skip to main content
10.1145/2678015.2682536acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespepmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Polyvariant Cardinality Analysis for Non-strict Higher-order Functional Languages: Brief Announcement

Published:13 January 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this brief announcement we outline work we have done on defining a polyvariant cardinality analysis for a non-strict higher-order language equipped with user defined datatypes and explicit strictness that includes sharing analysis, absence analysis, strictness analysis and uniqueness typing as a special case. It aims to be the basis of an analysis framework in a compiler for a Haskell-like language, that does not have access to an aggressive inliner such as the one present in GHC.

References

  1. E. Barendsen, S. Smetsers, et al. Uniqueness typing for functional languages with graph rewriting semantics. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science, 6(6):579--612, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. E. De Vries, R. Plasmeijer, and D. Abrahamson. Uniqueness typing simplified. Implementation and Application of Functional Languages, pages 201--218, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. A. Dijkstra, J. Fokker, and S. D. Swierstra. The architecture of the Utrecht Haskell Compiler. In Haskell '09: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Haskell, pages 93--104, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. J. Gustavsson. A type based sharing analysis for update avoidance and optimisation, volume 34. ACM, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. J. Hage and S. Holdermans. Heap recycling for lazy languages. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGPLAN symposium on Partial evaluation and semantics-based program manipulation, pages 189--197. ACM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. J. Hage, S. Holdermans, and A. Middelkoop. A generic usage analysis with subeffect qualifiers. In ACM SIGPLAN Notices, volume 42, pages 235--246. ACM, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. S. Holdermans and J. Hage. Making stricterness more relevant. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGPLAN workshop on Partial evaluation and program manipulation, pages 121--130. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. S. Holdermans and J. Hage. Polyvariant flow analysis with higher-ranked polymorphic types and higher-order effect operators. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGPLAN 2010 International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP '10), pages 63--74. ACM Press, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. J. Launchbury, A. Gill, J. Hughes, S. Marlow, S. Jones, and P. Wadler. Avoiding unnecessary updates. Functional Programming, Glasgow, pages 144--153, 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. I. Sergey, D. Vytiniotis, and S. Peyton Jones. Modular, higher-order cardinality analysis in theory and practice. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, POPL '14, pages 335--347, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. H. Verstoep. Counting analyses, 2013. MSc thesis, http://www.cs.uu.nl/wiki/Hage/CountingAnalyses.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. K. Wansbrough. Simple polymorphic usage analysis. PhD thesis, University of Cambridge, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Polyvariant Cardinality Analysis for Non-strict Higher-order Functional Languages: Brief Announcement

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          PEPM '15: Proceedings of the 2015 Workshop on Partial Evaluation and Program Manipulation
          January 2015
          152 pages
          ISBN:9781450332972
          DOI:10.1145/2678015

          Copyright © 2015 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 13 January 2015

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          PEPM '15 Paper Acceptance Rate14of27submissions,52%Overall Acceptance Rate66of120submissions,55%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader