Zine-El-Abidine Benaissa

dblp:26/6527 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1999
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 1 first-authorTheory of computation · 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
Programming languages and type systems · 83% Program verification · 17%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program verification
axiomatization
0.011998
Multi-Stage Programming: Axiomatization and Type Safety · ICALP 1998
Programming languages and type systems
language design
0.011998
Multi-Stage Programming: Axiomatization and Type Safety · ICALP 1998
Programming languages and type systems
language semantics
0.011998
Multi-Stage Programming: Axiomatization and Type Safety · ICALP 1998
Programming languages and type systems › metaprogramming
multi-stage programming
0.011998
Multi-Stage Programming: Axiomatization and Type Safety · ICALP 1998
Programming languages and type systems › type systems
type soundness
0.011998
Multi-Stage Programming: Axiomatization and Type Safety · ICALP 1998
Programming languages and type systems
type systems
0.011998
Multi-Stage Programming: Axiomatization and Type Safety · ICALP 1998
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1999 An Idealized MetaML: Simpler, and More Expressive
Eugenio Moggi, Walid Taha, Zine-El-Abidine Benaissa, Tim Sheard
ESOP3
1998 Multi-Stage Programming: Axiomatization and Type Safety
Walid Taha, Zine-El-Abidine Benaissa, Tim Sheard
ICALP2
1998 Building Program Optimizers with Rewriting Strategies
abstract
We describe a language for defining term rewriting strategies, and its application to the production of program optimizers. Valid transformations on program terms can be described by a set of rewrite rules; rewriting strategies are used to describe when and how the various rules should be applied in order to obtain the desired optimization effects. Separating rules from strategies in this fashion makes it easier to reason about the behavior of the optimizer as a whole, compared to traditional monolithic optimizer implementations. We illustrate the expressiveness of our language by using it to describe a simple optimizer for an ML-like intermediate representation.The basic strategy language uses operators such as sequential composition, choice, and recursion to build transformers from a set of labeled unconditional rewrite rules. We also define an extended language in which the side-conditions and contextual rules that arise in realistic optimizer specifications can themselves be expressed as strategy-driven rewrites. We show that the features of the basic and extended languages can be expressed by breaking down the rewrite rules into their primitive building blocks, namely matching and building terms in variable binding environments. This gives us a low-level core language which has a clear semantics, can be implemented straightforwardly and can itself be optimized. The current implementation generates C code from a strategy specification.
Eelco Visser, Zine-El-Abidine Benaissa, Andrew P. Tolmach
ICFP2
1996 lambda-nu, A Calculus of Explicit Substitutions which Preserves Strong Normalisation
abstract
Abstract Explicit substitutions were proposed by Abadi, Cardelli, Curien, Hardin and Lévy to internalise substitutions into λ-calculus and to propose a mechanism for computing on substitutions. λν is another view of the same concept which aims to explain the process of substitution and to decompose it in small steps. It favours simplicity and preservation of strong normalisation. This way, another important property is missed, namely confluence on open terms. In spirit, λν is closely related to another calculus of explicit substitutions proposed by de Bruijn and called C λξΦ. In this paper, we introduce λν, we present C λξΦ in the same framework as λν and we compare both calculi. Moreover, we prove properties of λν; namely λν correctly implements β reduction, λν is confluent on closed terms, i.e. on terms of classical λ-calculus and on all terms that are derived from those terms, and finally λν preserves strong normalisation in the following sense: strongly β normalising terms are strongly λν normalising.
Zine-El-Abidine Benaissa, Daniel Briaud, Pierre Lescanne, Jocelyne Rouyer-Degli
J. Funct. Program.1