Action semantics in retrospect

This paper is a themed account of the action semantics project, which Peter Mosses has led since the 1980s. It explains his motivations for developing action semantics, the inspirations behind its design, and the foundations of action semantics based on unified algebras. It goes on to outline some applications of action semantics to describe real programming languages, and some efforts to implement programming languages using action semantics directed compiler generation. It concludes by outlining more recent developments and reflecting on the success of the action semantics project

Software meta-language engineering and CBS

The SLE conference series is devoted to the engineering principles of software languages: their design, their implementation, and their evolution. This paper is about the role of language specification in SLE. A precise specification of a software language needs to be written in a formal meta-language, and it needs to co-evolve with the specified language. Moreover, different software languages often have features in common, which should provide opportunities for reuse of parts of language specifications. Support for co-evolution and reuse in a meta-language requires careful engineering of its design.The author has been involved in the development of several meta-languages for semantic specification, including action semantics and modular variants of structural operational semantics (MSOS, I-MSOS). This led to the PLanCompS project, and to the design of its meta-language, CBS, for component-based semantics. CBS comes together with an extensible library of reusable components called ‘funcons’, corresponding to fundamental programming constructs. The main aim of CBS is to optimise co-evolution and reuse of specifications during language development, and to make specification of language semantics almost as straightforward as context-free syntax specification.The paper discusses the engineering of a selection of previous meta-languages, assessing how well they support co-evolution and reuse. It then gives an introduction to CBS, and illustrates significant features. It also considers whether other current meta-languages might also be used to define an extensible library of funcons for use in component-based semantics

Formal Component-Based Semantics

One of the proposed solutions for improving the scalability of semantics of programming languages is Component-Based Semantics, introduced by Peter D. Mosses. It is expected that this framework can also be used effectively for modular meta theoretic reasoning. This paper presents a formalization of Component-Based Semantics in the theorem prover Coq. It is based on Modular SOS, a variant of SOS, and makes essential use of dependent types, while profiting from type classes. This formalization constitutes a contribution towards modular meta theoretic formalizations in theorem provers. As a small example, a modular proof of determinism of a mini-language is developed.Comment: In Proceedings SOS 2011, arXiv:1108.279

The nexus between cross-border migration and international trade: Evidence from Tanzania

This paper attempted to unlock the conundrum of migration-trade relationship in  Tanzania, using the country’s migrant stock (diaspora) in the parts of the world. It also aimed to investigate how this effect, if at all exist, differs between developing and  developed countries. The augmented gravity model of trade has been employed to  investigate the relationships between the variables. With cross-sectional data of 2013 that incorporated Tanzanian diaspora in different economies, the paper revealed that  both Tanzania exports and trade volume are positively affected by the migrant stock in the countries of destination; and that the effect is highly pronounced in developed than developing nations. However, as the gravity model captures large number of variables, the paper disclosed interesting findings on the contribution of some variables to the  Tanzania’s trade volume and exports.Keywords: Cross-border migration, International trade, Tanzani

Flag-based big-step semantics

Structural operational semantic specifications come in different styles: small-step and big-step. A problem with the big-step style is that specifying divergence and abrupt termination gives rise to annoying duplication. We present a novel approach to representing divergence and abrupt termination in big-step semantics using status flags. This avoids the duplication problem, and uses fewer rules and premises for representing divergence than previous approaches in the literature

Fundamental Constructs in Programming Languages

Specifying the semantics of a programming language formally can have many benefits. However, it can also require a huge effort. The effort can be significantly reduced by translating language syntax to so-called fundamental constructs (funcons). A translation to funcons is easy to update when the language evolves, and it exposes relationships between individual language constructs. The PLanCompS project has developed an initial collection of funcons (primarily for translation of functional and imperative languages). The behaviour of each funcon is defined, once and for all, using a modular variant of structural operational semantics. The definitions are available online. This paper introduces and motivates funcons. It illustrates translation of language constructs to funcons, and how funcons are defined. It also relates funcons to notation used in previous frameworks, including monadic semantics and action semantics.Comment: 20 pages plus appendix, submitted to ISoLA 202

CoFI: The Common Framework Initiative for Algebraic Specification and Development

An open collaborative effort has been initiated: to design acommon framework for algebraic specification and development of software. The rationale behind this initiative is that the lack of such a common framework greatly hinders the dissemination and application of researchresults in algebraic specification. In particular, the proliferationof specification languages, some differing in only quite minor ways from each other, is a considerable obstacle for the use of algebraic methods in industrial contexts, making it difficult to exploit standard examples, case studies and training material. A common framework with widespread acceptancethroughout the research community is urgently needed.The aim is to base the common framework as much as possible on a critical selection of features that have already been explored in various contexts. The common framework will provide a family of specificationlanguages at different levels: a central, reasonably expressive language, called CASL, for specifying (requirements, design, and architecture of) conventional software; restrictions of CASL to simpler languages, for use primarily in connection with prototyping and verification tools; and extensionsof CASL, oriented towards particular programming paradigms,such as reactive systems and object-based systems. It should also be possibleto embed many existing algebraic specification languages in members of the CASL family. A tentative design for CASL has already been proposed. Task groupsare studying its formal semantics, tool support, methodology, and other aspects, in preparation for the finalization of the design

Theory and Practice of Action Semantics

Action Semantics is a framework for the formal descriptionof programming languages. Its main advantage over other frameworksis pragmatic: action-semantic descriptions (ASDs) scale up smoothly torealistic programming languages. This is due to the inherent extensibilityand modifiability of ASDs, ensuring that extensions and changes tothe described language require only proportionate changes in its description.(In denotational or operational semantics, adding an unforeseenconstruct to a language may require a reformulation of the entire description.)After sketching the background for the development of action semantics,we summarize the main ideas of the framework, and provide a simpleillustrative example of an ASD. We identify which features of ASDsare crucial for good pragmatics. Then we explain the foundations ofaction semantics, and survey recent advances in its theory and practicalapplications. Finally, we assess the prospects for further developmentand use of action semantics.The action semantics framework was initially developed at the Universityof Aarhus by the present author, in collaboration with David Watt(University of Glasgow). Groups and individuals scattered around fivecontinents have since contributed to its theory and practice