VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Erik Crank
dblp:91/2893
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1991
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-author
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Programming languages and type systems · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Programming languages and type systems
lambda calculus |
0.0 | 1 | 1991 | Parameter-Passing and the Lambda Calculus · POPL 1991 |
Programming languages and type systems › language semantics › formal semantics
operational semantics |
0.0 | 1 | 1991 | Parameter-Passing and the Lambda Calculus · POPL 1991 |
Programming languages and type systems
equational theory |
0.0 | 1 | 1991 | Parameter-Passing and the Lambda Calculus · POPL 1991 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
strong normalization · 0.0rewriting semantics · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1991 | Parameter-Passing and the Lambda CalculusabstractThe choice of a parameter-passing technique is an important decision in the design of a high-level programming language. To clarify some of the semantic aspects of the decision, we develop, analyze, and compare modifications of the $\\lambda$-calculus for the most common parameter-passing techniques. More specifically, for each parameter-passing technique we provide (1) a program rewriting semantics for a language with side-effects and first-class procedures based on the respective parameter-passing technique; (2) an equational theory derived from the rewriting semantics; (3) a formal analysis of the correspondence between the calculus and the semantics; and (4) a strong normalization theorem for the largest possible imperative fragment of the theory.\nA comparison of the various systems reveals that Algol's call-by-name indeed satisfies the well-known $\\beta$ rule of the original $\\lambda$-calculus, but at the cost of complicated axioms for the imperative part of the theory. The simplest and most appealing axiom system appears to be the one for a call-by-value language with reference cells as first-class values. Erik Crank, Matthias Felleisen |
POPL | 1 |