A unified semantics for future Erlang Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by Ro. MEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable. Source Available from: K. C. Sivaramakrishnan "The semantics of both asynchronous send and receive guarantees that successive communication operations performed by the same thread get witnessed in the order in which they were issued. In this respect, an asynchronous send event shares functionality with a typical non- blocking send of the kind found in languages like Erlang (Armstrong et al., 1. Svensson et al., 2. MPI (Li et al., 2. However, an asynchronous receive does not exhibit the same behavior as a typical non- blocking receive. Show abstract][Hide abstract]ABSTRACT: Multi. MLton is an extension of the MLton compiler and runtime system that targets scalable, multicore architectures. It provides specific support for ACML, a derivative of Concurrent ML that allows for the construction of composable asynchronous events. To effectively manage asynchrony, we require the runtime to efficiently handle potentially large numbers of lightweight, short- lived threads, many of which are created specifically to deal with the implicit concurrency introduced by asynchronous events. Scalability demands also dictate that the runtime minimize global coordination. Multi. MLton therefore implements a split- heap memory manager that allows mutators and collectors running on different cores to operate mostly independently. More significantly, Multi. MLton exploits the premise that there is a surfeit of available concurrency in ACML programs to realize a new collector design that completely eliminates the need for read barriers, a source of significant overhead in other managed runtimes. These two symbiotic features - a thread design specifically tailored to support asynchronous communication, and a memory manager that exploits lightweight concurrency to greatly reduce barrier overheads - are Multi. MLton's key novelties. In this article, we describe the rationale, design, and implementation of these features, and provide experimental results over a range of parallel benchmarks and different multicore architectures including an 8. Azul Vega 3, and a 4. Intel SCC (Single- Cloud Computer), that justify our design decisions. Full- text · Article · Nov 2. In this paper we develop a new, much cleaner semantics, for such future implementations of Erlang. The formal semantics of Erlang is a bit too complicated to be easily understandable. A Unified Semantics for Future Erlang. Hans Svensson (Institutionen för data- och informationsteknik, Software Engineering (Chalmers)); Lars-Åke Fredlund; Clara Benac Earle. A unified semantics for future Erlang. Full Text: Pdf: Authors: Hans Svensson: Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden: Lars-Åke Fredlund: Universidad. The formal semantics of Erlang is a bit too complicated to be easily understandable. Full text: Pdf. > The statement 'X has Erlang like semantics' usually means 'X has Erlang like semantics > <emph>except for error handling</emph>' - handling errors out-of-band is a big win. > > Isolation is the key property that must be guaranteed for actors. If <<I>> can crash > <<your>> code then all bets are off. > That is why Cloud Haskell was built to follow the 'Unified Semantics for Future Erlang. list > > http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions. . Erlang does have different rules and semantics when it comes to registered/named processes. Cloud Haskell. Whilst Facundo is correct in pointing out that Erlang's unified semantics support remote process registration on a local node. see http:// for details. Have I misunderstood this??? Now, whilst I do not object to changing distributed-process to support this in principle. @@ -0,0 +1,72 @@ +@inproceedings{cloudhaskell, + author = {Epstein, Jeff and Black, Andrew P. and Peyton-Jones, Simon}, + title = {Towards {H}askell in the cloud}, + booktitle = {. 7 Semantics. Cloud Haskell Semantics (PDF) is an draft document that gives a more precise semantics to messaging in Cloud Haskell. The semantics is based on the Unified Semantics for Future Erlang paper, but extends it with a notion of 'reconnecting' (this is described in detail in the introduction of the document). A future Erlang implementation that adheres more closely to the Er-lang specifications. 0c96053c6d055c631a000000.pdf. Available from Hans Svensson · Jul 16, 2014. A more accurate semantics for distributed Erlang. Conference Paper: A unified semantics for future Erlang. Hans Svensson · Lars-Åke Fredlund · Clara Benac Earle [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]. Journal of Functional Programming Source Available from: Luca Aceto [Show abstract][Hide abstract]ABSTRACT: In this paper we propose an extension of the Rebeca language that can be used. We. provide the formal semantics of the language using Structural Operational. Semantics, and show its expressiveness by means of examples. We developed a. tool for automated translation from timed Rebeca to the Erlang language, which. Rebeca. We can use the tool to set the. Rebeca models, which represent the environment and. Mc. Erlang to run multiple simulations for different. Timed Rebeca restricts the modeller to a pure asynchronous. Simulation is shown to be an effective analysis support. Full- text · Article · Jul 2. Science of Computer Programming Source Available from: Adrian Francalanza [Show abstract][Hide abstract]ABSTRACT: We study the correctness of automated synthesis for concurrent mon- itors. We adapt s. HML, a subset of the Hennessy- Milner logic with recursion, to specify safety properties of Erlang programs, and define an automated transla- tion from s. HML formulas to Erlang monitors so as to detect formula violations at runtime. We then formalise monitor correctness for our concurrent setting and describe a technique that allows us to prove monitor correctness in stages; this technique is used to prove the correctness of our automated monitor synthesis. Full- text · Article · Sep 2. Lecture Notes in Computer Science Show more.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
September 2016
Categories |