Constraint-based mode analysis of mercury

Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Principles and Practice of Declarative Programming (PPDP'02)

Volumn , Issue , 2002, Pages 109-120

  Overton, David ^a   Somogyi, Zoltan ^a   Stuckey, Peter J ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Boolean constraints; Mode analysis; Modes

Indexed keywords

BOOLEAN FUNCTIONS; COMPUTER SYSTEM RECOVERY; DATA FLOW ANALYSIS; DATA STRUCTURES; GRAPH THEORY; LOGIC PROGRAMMING; MODAL ANALYSIS; OPTIMIZATION; PROGRAM COMPILERS;

REDUCED ORDERED BINARY DECISIONS DIAGRAMS (ROBDD);

COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES;

EID: 0036989097     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/571157.571169     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. J. Boye and J. Malłuszyński. Directional types and the annotation method. JLP, 33(3):179-220, 1997.
2. R. Bryant. Graph-based algorithms for Boolean function manipulation. IEEE Transactions on Computers, C-35(8):677-691, 1986.
3. B. Le Charlier and P. Van Hentenryck. Experimental evaluation of a generic abstract interpretation algorithm for Prolog. ACM TOPLAS, 16(1):35-101, 1994.
4. K. Cho and K. Ueda. Diagnosing non-well-moded concurrent logic programs. In Procs. of ICLP96, 215-229. MIT Press, 1996.
5. C. Codognet, P. Codognet, and M. Corsini. Abstract interpretation of concurrent logic languages. In Procs. of NACLP 1990, 215-232, MIT Press 1990.
6. S. K. Debray. Static inference of modes and data dependencies in logic programs. ACM TOPLAS, 11(3):418-450, 1989.
7. S. Etalle and M. Gabbrielli. Layered Modes. JLP, 39:225-244, 1999.
8. M. García de la Banda: P. Stuckey, W. Harvey, and K. Marriott. Mode checking in HAL. In Procs. of CL2000, LNCS 1861, 1270-1284, 2000.
9. F. Kluzniak. Type synthesis for ground Prolog. In Procs. of ICLP87. 788-816, MIT Press, 1987.
10. G. Janssens and M. Bruynooghe. Deriving descriptions of possible value of program variables by means of abstract interpretation. JLP, 13:208-258, 1993.
11. C. Mellish. The automatic derivation of mode declarations for Prolog programs. Research paper 163, Dept. of AI, University of Edinburgh, 1981.
12. A. Mulkers, W. Simoens, G. Janssens, and M. Bruynooghe. On the practicality of abstract equation systems. In Procs. of ICLP95. 781-796, MIT Press, 1995.
13. A. Mycroft and R. A. O'Keefe. A polymorphic type system for Prolog. AI, 23:295-307, 1984.
14. O. Ridoux, P. Boizumault, and F. Malesieux. Typed static analysis: Application to groundness analysis of Prolog and lambda-Prolog. In Procs. of FLOPS99, LNCS 1722, 267-283, 1999.
15. P. Ross, D. Overton, and Z. Somogyi. Making Mercury programs tail recursive. In Procs. of LOPSTR99, LNCS 1817, 196-215, 1999.
16. P. Schachte. Efficient ROBDD operations for program analysis. In Procs. of the Nineteenth Australasian Computer Science Conference, 347-356. Australian Computer Science Communications, 1996.
17. J.-G. Smaus, P. Hills and A. King. Mode analysis domains for typed logic programs. In Procs. of LOPSTR99, LNCS 1817, 82-101, 2000.
18. Z. Somogyi. A system of precise modes for logic programs. In Procs. of ICLP87, 769-787, MIT Press, 1987.
19. Z. Somogyi, F. Henderson, and T. Conway. The execution algorithm of Mercury, an efficient purely declarative logic programming language. JLP, 26(1-3):17-64, 1996.
20. W. Vanhoof. Binding-time analysis by constraint solving: A modular and higher-order approach for Mercury. In Procs. of LPAR2000, LNAI 1955, 399-416. Springer-Verlag, 2000.