English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This work is part of a research project on automatic generation of optimazing compilers from denotational language definitions. The novel aspect of our approach is that we are based on a two-level meta-language allowing us to distinguish between compile-time and run-time, and thereby to formalize e.g. the distinction between "static expression procedures" and "expression procedures" of Tennent (1981). In this paper we discuss some of the problems encountered when writing denotational definitions using a two-level meta-language. We consider the meta-language TMLS introduced in Nielson (1986a) as well as its restricted version TMLSC developed in Nielson and Nielson (1986) for automatic code generation. Based on an example we argue that rewriting a language definition using TMLS in TMLSC really means introducing some notion of activation record. This observation may pave the way for a formalization of the transformations on semantic definitions considered by Milne and Strachey (1976) as being imposed by different meta-languages.

Pragmatic aspects of two-level denotational meta-languages