Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Sam Harwell
dblp:129/8242
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2014
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2
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
2 papers |
Compilers and program optimization · 33% Program synthesis and code generation · 29% Software maintenance and evolution · 29% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Compilers and program optimization
parsing |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Adaptive LL(*) parsing: the power of dynamic analysis · OOPSLA 2014 |
Program synthesis and code generation
code completion |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Temporal code completion and navigation · ICSE 2013 |
Software maintenance and evolution › program comprehension
code navigation |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Temporal code completion and navigation · ICSE 2013 |
Programming languages and type systems › grammar formalisms
grammar analysis |
0.1 | 1 | 2014 | Adaptive LL(*) parsing: the power of dynamic analysis · OOPSLA 2014 |
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | Adaptive LL(*) parsing: the power of dynamic analysisabstractDespite the advances made by modern parsing strategies such as PEG, LL(*), GLR, and GLL, parsing is not a solved problem. Existing approaches suffer from a number of weaknesses, including difficulties supporting side-effecting embedded actions, slow and/or unpredictable performance, and counter-intuitive matching strategies. This paper introduces the ALL(*) parsing strategy that combines the simplicity, efficiency, and predictability of conventional top-down LL(k) parsers with the power of a GLR-like mechanism to make parsing decisions. The critical innovation is to move grammar analysis to parse-time, which lets ALL(*) handle any non-left-recursive context-free grammar. ALL(*) is O(n4) in theory but consistently performs linearly on grammars used in practice, outperforming general strategies such as GLL and GLR by orders of magnitude. ANTLR 4 generates ALL(*) parsers and supports direct left-recursion through grammar rewriting. Widespread ANTLR 4 use (5000 downloads/month in 2013) provides evidence that ALL(*) is effective for a wide variety of applications. Terence Parr, Sam Harwell, Kathleen Fisher |
OOPSLA | 2 |
| 2013 | Temporal code completion and navigationabstractModern IDEs make many software engineering tasks easier by automating functionality such as code completion and navigation. However, this functionality operates on one version of the code at a time. We envision a new approach that makes code completion and navigation aware of code evolution and enables them to operate on multiple versions at a time, without having to manually switch across these versions. We illustrate our approach on several example scenarios. We also describe a prototype Eclipse plugin that embodies our approach for code completion and navigation for Java code. We believe our approach opens a new line of research that adds a novel, temporal dimension for treating code in IDEs in the context of tasks that previously required manual switching across different code versions. Yun Young Lee, Sam Harwell, Sarfraz Khurshid, Darko Marinov |
ICSE | 2 |