- Sponsor:
- sigsoft
No abstract available.
Proceeding Downloads
An efficient approach for accessing C data structures from JavaScript
We present a novel approach for allowing JavaScript applications to access C data structures without performance overhead or additional boiler plate code.
Dynamic languages such as JavaScript do not have a fixed memory layout for run-time data nor do ...
Data interface + algorithms = efficient programs: separating logic from representation to improve performance
Finding the right algorithm--data structure combination is easy, but finding the right data structure for a set of algorithms is much less trivial. Moreover, using the same data representation throughout the whole program might be sub-optimal. Depending ...
We are all economists now: economic utility for multiple heap sizing
Multiple virtual machine (VM) workloads are increasingly common, given the growth of managed enterprise application systems and consolidated virtual servers. Until now, there has been no principled approach to partitioning memory resource between ...
A way forward in parallelising dynamic languages
Dynamic languages became very popular in recent years. At some point, the need for concurrency arose, and many of them made the choice to use a single global interpreter lock (GIL) to synchronise the interpreter in a multithreading scenario. This choice,...
The GOOL system: a lightweight object-oriented programming language translator
The GOOL system is a lightweight translator between OOP languages (Java, C++, C#, Objective C, ...). It relies upon a minimal, abstract OOP language called GOOL (General Object-Oriented Language) in order to represent the common features between these ...
Why inheritance anomaly is not worth solving
Modern computers improve their predecessors with additional parallelism but require concurrent software to exploit it. Object-orientation is instrumental in simplifying sequential programming, however, in a concurrent setting, programmers adding new ...
Recommendations
Acceptance Rates
Year | Submitted | Accepted | Rate |
---|---|---|---|
ICOOOLPS '18 | 6 | 5 | 83% |
ICOOOLPS'17 | 8 | 6 | 75% |
Overall | 14 | 11 | 79% |