Skip to content
Free planNo credit card requiredStart writing
AI for Research home
AI for Research home
Dashboard
Sign inGet started

Search 250 million research papers

Read the abstract, see who wrote it and who cites it, and get the citation in APA, MLA, Chicago or Harvard.

About 10,000 papers for “programming language design”

Programming Language Design Concepts

David A. Watt · 2004

Preface.PART I: INTRODUCTION.1. Programming Languages.1.1 Programming linguistics.1.1.1 Concepts and paradigms.1.1.2 Syntax, semantics, and pragmatics.1.1.3 Language processors.1.2 Historical development.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.PART II: BASIC CONCEPTS2. Values and Types.2.1 Types.2.2 Primitive types.2.2.1 Built-in primitive types.2.2.2 Defined primitive types.2.2.3 Discrete primitive types.2.3 Composite types.2.3.1 Cartesian products, structures, and records.2.3.2 Mappings, arrays, and functions.2.3.3 Disjoint unions, discriminated records, and objects.2.4 Recursive types.2.4.1 Lists.2.4.2 Strings.2.4.3 Recursive types in general.2.5 Type systems.2.5.1 Static vs dynamic typing.2.5.2 Type equivalence.2.5.3 The Type Completeness Principle.2.6 Expressions.2.6.1 Literals.2. 6.2 Constructions.2.6.3 Function calls.2.6.4 Conditional expressions.2.6.5 Iterative expressions.2.6.6 Constant and variable accesses.2.7 Implementation notes.2.7.1 Representation of primitive types.2.7.2 Representation of Cartesian products.2.7.3 Representation of arrays.2.7.4 Representation of disjoint unions.2.7.5 Representation of recursive types.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.3. Variables and Storage.3.1 Variables and storage.3.2 Simple variables.3.3 Composite variables.3.3.1 Total vs selective update.3.3.2 Static vs dynamic vs flexible arrays.3.4 Copy semantics vs reference semantics.3.5 Lifetime.3.5.1 Global and local variables.3.5.2 Heap variables.3.5.3 Persistent variables.3.6 Pointers.3.6.1 Pointers and recursive types.3.6.2 Dangling pointers.3.7 Commands.3.7.1 Skips.3.7.2 Assignments.3.7.3 Procedure calls.3.7.4 Sequential commands.3.7.5 Collateral commands.3.7.6 Conditional commands.3.7.7 Iterative commands.3.8 Expressions with side effects.3.8.1 Command expressions.3.8.2 Expression-oriented languages.3.9 Implementation notes3.9.1 Storage for global and local variables.3.9.2 Storage for heap variables.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.4. Bindings and Scope.4.1 Bindings and environments.4.2 Scope.4.2.1 Block structure.4.2.2 Scope and visibility.4.2.3 Static vs dynamic scoping.4.3 Declarations.4.3.1 Type declarations.4.3.2 Constant declarations.4.3.3 Variable declarations.4.3.4 Procedure definitions.4.3.5 Collateral declarations.4.3.6 Sequential declarations.4.3.6 Recursive declarations.4.3.8 Scopes of declarations.4.4 Blocks.4.4.1 Block commands.4.4.2 Block expressions.4.4.3 The Qualification Principle.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.5. Procedural Abstraction.5.1 Function procedures and proper procedures.5.1.1 Function procedures.5.1.2 Proper procedures5.1.3 The Abstraction Principle.5.2 Parameters and arguments.5.2.1 Copy parameter mechanisms.5.2.2 Reference parameter mechanisms.5.2.3 The Correspondence Principle.5.3 Implementation notes5.3.1 Implementation of procedure calls.5.3.1 Implementation of parameter passing.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.PART III: ADVANCED CONCEPTS.6. Data Abstraction.6.1 Program units, packages, and encapsulation.6.1.1 Packages.6.1.2 Encapsulation.6.2 Abstract types.6.3 Objects and classes.6.3.1 Classes.6.3.2 Subclasses and inheritance.6.3.3 Abstract classes.6.3.4. Single vs multiple inheritance.6.3.5 Interfaces.6.4 Implementation notes.6.4.1 Representation of objects6.4.2 Implementation of method calls.Summary.Further readingExercises.7. Generic Abstraction.7.1 Generic units and instantiation.7.1.1 Generic packages in ADA.7.1.2 Generic classes in C++.7.2 Type and class parameters.7.2.1 Type parameters in ADA.7.2.2 Type parameters in C++.7.2.3 Class parameters in JAVA.7.3 Implementation notes7.3.1 Implementation of ADA generic units.7.3.2 Implementation of C++ generic units.7.3.3 Implementation of JAVA generic units.Summary.Further reading.Exercises8. Type Systems.8.1 Inclusion polymorphism.8.1.1 Types and subtypes.8.1.2 Classes and subclasses.8.2 Parametric polymorphism.8.2.1 Polymorphic procedures.8.2.2 Parameterized types.8.2.3 Type inference.8.3 Overloading.8.4 Type conversions.8.5 Implementation notes8.5.1 Implementation of polymorphic procedures.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.9. Control Flow.9.1 Sequencers.9.2 Jumps.9.3 Escapes.9.4 Exceptions.9.5 Implementation notes9.5.1 Implementation of jumps and escapes.9.5.2 Implementation of exceptions.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.10. Concurrency (by William Findlay).10.1 Why concurrency?.10.2 Programs and processes.10.3 Problems with concurrency.10.3.1 Nondeterminism.10.3.2 Speed dependence.10.3.3 Deadlock.10.3.4 Starvation.10.4 Process interactions.10.4.1 Independent processes.10.4.2 Competing processes.10.4.3 Communicating processes.10.5 Concurrency primitives.10.5.1 Process creation and control.10.5.2 Interrupts.10.5.3 Spin locks and wait-free algorithms.10.5.4 Events.10.5.5 Semaphores.10.5.6 Messages.10.5.7 Remote procedure calls.10.6 Concurrent control abstractions.10.6.1 Conditional critical regions.10.6.2 Monitors.10.6.3 Rendezvous.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.PART IV: PARADIGMS11. Imperative Programming.11.1 Key concepts.11.2 Pragmatics.11.2.1 A simple spellchecker.11.3 Case study: C.11.3.1 Values and types.11.3.2 Variables, storage, and control.11.3.3 Bindings and scope.11.3.4 Procedural abstraction.11.3.5 Independent compilation.11.3.6 Preprocessor directives.11.3.7 Function library.11.3.8 A simple spellchecker.11.4 Case study: ADA.11.4.1 Values and types.11.4.2 Variables, storage, and control.11.4.3 Bindings and scope.11.4.4 Procedural abstraction.11.4.5 Data abstraction.11.4.6 Generic abstraction.11.4.7 Separate compilation.11.4.8 Package library.11.4.9 A simple spellchecker.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.12. Object-Oriented Programming.12.1 Key Concepts.12.2 Pragmatics.12.3 Case study: C++.12.3.1 Values and types.12.3.2 Variables, storage, and control.12.3.3 Bindings and scope.12.3.4 Procedural abstraction.12.3.5 Data abstraction.12.3.6 Generic abstraction.12.3.7 Independent compilation and preprocessor directives12.3.8 Class and template library.12.3.9 A simple spellchecker.12.4 Case study: JAVA.12.4.1 Values and types.12.4.2 Variables, storage, and control.12.4.3 Bindings and scope.12.4.4 Procedural abstraction.12.4.5 Data abstraction.12.4.6 Generic abstraction.12.4.7 Separate compilation and dynamic linking.12.4.8 Class library.12.4.9 A simple spellchecker.12.5 Case study: ADA95.12.5.1 Types.12.5.2 Data abstraction.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.13. Concurrent Programming (by William Findlay).13.1 Key concepts.13.2 Pragmatics.13.3 Case study: ADA95.13.3.1 Process creation and termination.13.3.2 Mutual exclusion.13.3.3 Admission control.13.3.4 Scheduling away deadlock.13.4 Case study: JAVA.13.4.1 Process creation and termination.13.4.2 Mutual exclusion.13.4.3 Admission control.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.14. Functional Programming.14.1 Key concepts.14.1.1 Eager vs normal-order vs lazy evaluation.14.2 Pragmatics.14.3 Case study: HASKELL.14.3.1 Values and types.14.3.2 Bindings and scope.14.3.3 Procedural abstraction.14.3.4 Lazy evaluation.14.3.5 Data abstraction.14.3.6 Generic abstraction.14.3.7 Modeling state.14.3.8 A simple spellchecker.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.15. Logic Programming.15.1 Key concepts.15.2 Pragmatics.15.3 Case study: PROLOG.15.3.1 Values, variables, and terms.15.3.2 Assertions and clauses.15.3.3 Relations.15.3.4 The closed-world assumption.15.3.5 Bindings and scope.15.3.6 Control.15.3.7 Input/output.15.3.8 A simple spellchecker.Summary.Further reading.Exercises16. Scripting.16.1 Pragmatics.16.1.1 Regular expressions.16.2 Case study: PYTHON.16.2.1 Values and types.16.2.2 Variables, storage, and control16.2.3 Bindings and scope.16.2.4 Procedural abstraction.16.2.5 Data abstraction.16.2.6 Separate compilation16.2.7 Module library.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.PART V: CONCLUSION.17. Language Selection.17.1 Criteria.17.2 Evaluation.Summary.Exercises.18. Language Design.18.1 Selection of concepts.18.2 Regularity.18.3 Simplicity.18.4 Efficiency.18.5 Syntax.18.6 Language life cycles.18.7 The future.Summary.Further reading.Exercises.Bibliography.Glossary.Index.

Cited by 63

Language design for programming reliability

John D. Gannon, J. J. Horning · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · 1975

The language in which programs are written can have a substantial effect on their reliability. This paper discusses the design of programming languages to enhance reliability. It presents several general design principles, and then applies them to particular languages constructs. Since the validity of such design principles cannot be logically proved, empirical evidence is needed to support or discredit them. A major experiment to measure the effect of nine specific language-design decisions in one context has been performed. Analysis of the frequency and persistence of errors shows that several decisions had a significant impact on reliability.

Cited by 72

Extensibility in programming language design

Thomas A. Standish · ACM SIGPLAN Notices · 1975

article Free Access Share on Extensibility in programming language design Author: Thomas A. Standish University of California at Irvine, Irvine, California University of California at Irvine, Irvine, CaliforniaView Profile Authors Info & Claims ACM SIGPLAN NoticesVolume 10Issue 7July 1975 pp 18–21https://doi.org/10.1145/987305.987310Online:01 July 1975Publication History 15citation391DownloadsMetricsTotal Citations15Total Downloads391Last 12 Months10Last 6 weeks2 Get Citation AlertsNew Citation Alert added!This alert has been successfully added and will be sent to:You will be notified whenever a record that you have chosen has been cited.To manage your alert preferences, click on the button below.Manage my AlertsNew Citation Alert!Please log in to your account Save to BinderSave to BinderCreate a New BinderNameCancelCreateExport CitationPublisher SiteeReaderPDF

Cited by 17Open access

Design of the Nectar Programming Language.

Amlal El Mahrouss · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2026

Design of the Nectar Programming Language. Abstract: Nectar as presented in its primer is a systems compiled programming language—designed for low-level systems programming with high-level abstractions.

Cited by 0Open access

Wybe: Design of a Programming Language

Peter Schachte · Preprints.org · 2025

We propose a set of design principles to guide the design of a programming language intended for general, practical use. These principles centre around supporting development of robust programs, supporting independent development and evolution of separate components of an application, and developing programs with adequate performance. We identify one key principle, interface integrity, as the most important characteristic of declarative programming languages. Following these principles has led to the development of the Wybe programming language, which provides a range of features common in functional, procedural, and logic programming languages. In particular, we argue that it provides much of the benefit of declarative programming languages, while providing much of the flexibility of imperative programming.

Cited by 0Open access

Programming language neutral design pattern detection

Ákos Nagy, Bence Kővári · 2015

Object-oriented design patterns offer a structural and behavioral solution for a given problem in a given context using basic building blocks. They are widely used in software engineering as they promote extensibility, testability, maintainability and reusability. However, besides their use, their detection also has a great significance in the industry. This paper first presents a general, programming language neutral model and architecture for automated design pattern detection in object-oriented source code. To validate the recognition-capability of the framework, we implemented a version to recognize design patterns in C#. To our knowledge, this is the first work in the field that examines source code written in C#. We also discuss actual results of running this implementation on a number of class libraries. These results can later be used as reference for other works focusing on the C# programming language.

Cited by 8

1A Programming Language Design Using XML

Tsunetoshi Hayashi · 2014

Abstract—Traditionally a source program of a programming language is written in a text format. In this submission, we propose a different method to describe a source program, which is much adequate for embedding written programs into some web pages, as currently done with JavaScript. And this method makes it very simple to develop a compiler and/or an interpreter. It may help to write a program that can modify itself while it is running. In our method, a program is written as an XML (eXtensible Markup Language) document. The language is tentatively called scriptXML. A source program is represented by some XML tags, and organized in a hierarchical tree structure, that is DOM (document object model). Since a programming language is defined by a Context Free Grammar, this is a natural representation of a program. An interpreter, or a compiler, could be easily constructed, as internal hierarchical structure of a source program is presented in its description. Neither lexical processing nor parsing is required. Therefor the interpreter/Compiler is a simple tree walk matter. We will give a concrete design of a programming language as an example of application of this method. And we also propose some considerations on how to compose such a program. Instead of using an XML editor, we might develop a text format editor with a backend to generate a program document in XML. Index Terms—Extensible markup language, Program descrip-tion, Scripting languages. I.

Cited by 0

Design of the Nectar Programming Language.

Amlal El Mahrouss · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2026

The Design of the Nectar Programming Language. Abstract: Nectar as presented in its primer—is a compiled programming language—designed for systems programming with high-level abstractions. It is statically typed—compiled, and supports multi-paradigm programming. This paper covers the mathematical concepts behind the language.

Cited by 0Open access

Design of the Nectar Programming Language.

Amlal El Mahrouss · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2026

Design of the Nectar Programming Language. Abstract: Nectar as presented in its primer is a systems compiled programming language—designed for low-level systems programming with high-level abstractions.

Cited by 0Open access

Design of the Nectar Programming Language.

Amlal El Mahrouss · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2026

The Design of the Nectar Programming Language. Abstract: Nectar as presented in its primer—is a compiled programming language—designed for systems programming with high-level abstractions. It is statically typed—compiled, and supports multi-paradigm programming. This paper covers the mathematical concepts behind the language.

Cited by 0Open access

Programming Language Design in Cybernetics Applications

Trong Wu · 2006

The principles of cybernetics have been applied in many fields. With currently renewed and fast growing of interest, it is the time to address the commonly needs for various applications in related to programming language design. The errands of cybernetics application are including the extending of application domain, subdividing the problem, building of reliability features, dealing of parallel and concurrent computation, handling of error states, and creating of precision requirements. This paper studies those programming language features that can accomplish these errands in the commonly existing programming languages for cybernetics application.

Cited by 0