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.

Bob Cassels

dblp:98/5636 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 1996
—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
Programming languages and type systems · 100%

Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Programming languages and type systems › object-oriented programming
multiple inheritance
0.011996
A Monotonic Superclass Linearization for Dylan · OOPSLA 1996

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

class hierarchy analysis · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1996 A Monotonic Superclass Linearization for Dylan
abstract
Object-oriented languages with multiple inheritance and automatic conflict resolution typically use a linearization of superclasses to determine which version of a property to inherit when several superclasses provide definitions. Recent work has defined several desirable characteristics for linearizations, the most important being monotonicity, which prohibits inherited properties from skipping over direct superclasses. Combined with Dylan's sealing mechanism, a monotonic linearization enables some compile-time method selection that would otherwise be impossible in the absence of a closed-world assumption.The Dylan linearization is monotonic, easily described, strictly observes local precedence order, and produces the same ordering as CLOS when that is monotonic. We present an implementation based on merging and a survey of class heterarchies from several large programs, analyzing where commonly used linearizations differ.
Kim Barrett, Bob Cassels, Paul Haahr, David A. Moon, Keith Playford, P. Tucker Withington
OOPSLA2