A separate compilation extension to standard ML

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

A separate compilation extension to standard ML

Full text

Pdf (268 KB)

Source

International Conference on Functional Programming archive
Proceedings of the 2006 workshop on ML table of contents

Portland, Oregon, USA

SESSION: Session 2 table of contents

Pages: 32 - 42

Year of Publication: 2006

ISBN:1-59593-483-9

Authors

David Swasey	Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
Tom Murphy, VII	Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
Karl Crary	Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
Robert Harper	Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA

Sponsors

SIGPLAN: ACM Special Interest Group on Programming Languages
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 2, Downloads (12 Months): 12, Citation Count: 0

Additional Information:

abstract references index terms collaborative colleagues

Tools and Actions:	Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTex EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1159876.1159883 What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

We present an extension to Standard ML, called SMLSC, to support separate compilation. The system gives meaning to individual program fragments, called units. Units may depend on one another in a way specified by the programmer. A dependency may be mediated by an interface (the type of a unit); if so, the units can be compiled separately. Otherwise, they must be compiled in sequence. We also propose a methodology for programming in SMLSC that reflects code development practice and avoids syntactic repetition of interfaces. The language is given a formal semantics, and we argue that this semantics is implementable in a variety of compilers.

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

	1	Rolf Adams , Walter Tichy , Annette Weinert, The cost of selective recompilation and environment processing, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), v.3 n.1, p.3-28, Jan. 1994 [doi>10.1145/174634.174637]
	2	Matthias Blume, Dependency analysis for Standard ML, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), v.21 n.4, p.790-812, July 1999 [doi>10.1145/325478.325481]
	3	Matthias Blume. CM: The SML/NJ compilation and library manager (for SML/NJ version 110.40 and later) user manual, 2002. http://www.smlnj.org/doc/CM/new.pdf.
	4	Matthias Blume , Andrew W. Appel, Hierarchical modularity, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), v.21 n.4, p.813-847, July 1999 [doi>10.1145/325478.325518]
	5	Luca Cardelli, Program fragments, linking, and modularization, Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.266-277, January 15-17, 1997, Paris, France [doi>10.1145/263699.263735]
	6	Henry Cejtin, Matthew Fluet, Suresh Jagannathan, and Stephen Weeks. Formal specification of the ML Basis system, January 2005. http://mlton.org/MLBasis.
	7	Martin Elsman. Program Modules, Separate Compilation, and Intermodule Optimisation. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Copenhagen, January 1999.
	8	Neal Glew , Greg Morrisett, Type-safe linking and modular assembly language, Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.250-261, January 20-22, 1999, San Antonio, Texas, United States [doi>10.1145/292540.292563]
	9	Robert Harper , Peter Lee , Frank Pfenning , Eugene Rollins, Incremental Recompilation for Standard ML of New Jersey, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, 1994
	10	Robert Harper , Mark Lillibridge, A type-theoretic approach to higher-order modules with sharing, Proceedings of the 21st ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.123-137, January 16-19, 1994, Portland, Oregon, United States [doi>10.1145/174675.176927]
	11	Robert Harper and Benjamin C. Pierce. Design considerations for ML-style module systems. In Benjamin C. Pierce, editor, Advanced Topics in Types and Programming Languages, chapter 8, pages 293--346. MIT Press, 2005.
	12	Robert Harper and Christopher Stone. An interpretation of Standard ML in type theory. Technical Report CMU-CS-97-147, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, June 1997.
	13	Robert Harper , Christopher Stone, A type-theoretic interpretation of standard ML, Proof, language, and interaction: essays in honour of Robin Milner, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2000
	14	Trevor Jim, What are principal typings and what are they good for?, Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.42-53, January 21-24, 1996, St. Petersburg Beach, Florida, United States [doi>10.1145/237721.237728]
	15	Xavier Leroy, Damien Doligez, Jacques Garrigue, Didier Rémy, and Jérôme Vouillon. The Objective Caml system release 3.09: Documentation and user's manual, 2005. http://caml.inria.fr/pub/docs/manual-ocaml/index.html.
	16	Robin Milner , Mads Tofte , Robert Harper, The definition of Standard ML, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990
	17	MLKit web site. http://www.itu.dk/research/mlkit/index.php/Main_Page.
	18	MLton web site. http://mlton.org/.
	19	Greg Morrisett , David Walker , Karl Crary , Neal Glew, From system F to typed assembly language, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), v.21 n.3, p.527-568, May 1999 [doi>10.1145/319301.319345]
	20	Sergei Romanenko, Claudio Russo, and Peter Sestoft. Moscow ML owner's manual version 2.00, June 2000. http://www.dina.kvl.dk/~sestoft/mosml/manual.pdf.
	21	David Swasey, Tom Murphy, VII, Karl Crary, and Robert Harper. A separate compilation extension to Standard ML (extended technical report). Technical Report CMU-CS-06-133, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, 2006.