Dynamically typed languages

Dynamically typed languages such as Python and Ruby have experienced a rapid grown in popularity in recent times. However, there is much confusion as to what makes these languages interesting relative to statically typed languages, and little knowledge of their rich history. In this chapter I explore the general topic of dynamically typed languages, how they differ from statically typed languages, their history, and their defining features

IRS II: a framework and infrastructure for semantic web services

In this paper we describe IRS–II (Internet Reasoning Service) a framework and implemented infrastructure, whose main goal is to support the publication, location, composition and execution of heterogeneous web services, augmented with semantic descriptions of their functionalities. IRS–II has three main classes of features which distinguish it from other work on semantic web services. Firstly, it supports one-click publishing of standalone software: IRS–II automatically creates the appropriate wrappers, given pointers to the standalone code. Secondly, it explicitly distinguishes between tasks (what to do) and methods (how to achieve tasks) and as a result supports capability-driven service invocation; flexible mappings between services and problem specifications; and dynamic, knowledge-based service selection. Finally, IRS–II services are web service compatible – standard web services can be trivially published through the IRS–II and any IRS–II service automatically appears as a standard web service to other web service infrastructures. In the paper we illustrate the main functionalities of IRS–II through a scenario involving a distributed application in the healthcare domain

Some Notes on the Past and Future of Lisp-Stat

Lisp-Stat was originally developed as a framework for experimenting with dynamic graphics in statistics. To support this use, it evolved into a platform for more general statistical computing. The choice of the Lisp language as the basis of the system was in part coincidence and in part a very deliberate decision. This paper describes the background behind the choice of Lisp, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of this choice. The paper then discusses some lessons that can be drawn from experience with Lisp-Stat and with the R language to guide future development of Lisp-Stat, R, and similar systems.

Linguistic Reflection in Java

Reflective systems allow their own structures to be altered from within. Here we are concerned with a style of reflection, called linguistic reflection, which is the ability of a running program to generate new program fragments and to integrate these into its own execution. In particular we describe how this kind of reflection may be provided in the compiler-based, strongly typed object-oriented programming language Java. The advantages of the programming technique include attaining high levels of genericity and accommodating system evolution. These advantages are illustrated by an example taken from persistent programming which shows how linguistic reflection allows functionality (program code) to be generated on demand (Just-In-Time) from a generic specification and integrated into the evolving running program. The technique is evaluated against alternative implementation approaches with respect to efficiency, safety and ease of use.Comment: 25 pages. Source code for examples at http://www-ppg.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/Java/ReflectionExample/ Dynamic compilation package at http://www-ppg.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/Java/DynamicCompilation

The C++0x "Concepts" Effort

C++0x is the working title for the revision of the ISO standard of the C++ programming language that was originally planned for release in 2009 but that was delayed to 2011. The largest language extension in C++0x was "concepts", that is, a collection of features for constraining template parameters. In September of 2008, the C++ standards committee voted the concepts extension into C++0x, but then in July of 2009, the committee voted the concepts extension back out of C++0x. This article is my account of the technical challenges and debates within the "concepts" effort in the years 2003 to 2009. To provide some background, the article also describes the design space for constrained parametric polymorphism, or what is colloquially know as constrained generics. While this article is meant to be generally accessible, the writing is aimed toward readers with background in functional programming and programming language theory. This article grew out of a lecture at the Spring School on Generic and Indexed Programming at the University of Oxford, March 2010