Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Yojiro Morimoto

dblp:07/3914 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 1982
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1

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
Runtime systems and virtual machines · 33% Compilers and program optimization · 33% Software maintenance and evolution · 33%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
High-performance computing · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Runtime systems and virtual machines › interpreter
interpreter performance
0.011982
Performance Adjustment of an APL Interpreter · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1982
Compilers and program optimization
microprogramming
0.011982
Performance Adjustment of an APL Interpreter · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1982
Software maintenance and evolution
software modularization
0.011982
Performance Adjustment of an APL Interpreter · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1982
High-performance computing
performance optimization
0.011982
Performance Adjustment of an APL Interpreter · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1982
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1982 Performance Adjustment of an APL Interpreter
abstract
An APL interpreter is analyzed to examine how microprogramming can improve its performance. Also examined is how the modularization method or program structure affects performance improvement. Two basic modularization methods, function and data modularizations, are investigated. We rind that the performance gain may reach 100-time speed-up and that a proper selection of modules is very important to obtain the maximum performance gain under a limited microprogram memory. We also find that both the function and the data modularizations provide the same degree of performance improvement despite the finding that they tend to affect the complementary parts of a program.
Mamoru Maekawa, Yojiro Morimoto
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.2