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

Suad Alagic

dblp:a/SuadAlagic · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
16ranked-venue papers
14as first author
0since 2021 · last 2008
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 6 · 5 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 4 · 4 first-authorTheory of computation · 4 · 3 first-authorApplied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2 · 2 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
5 papers
Programming languages and type systems · 100%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
3 papers
Data models and query languages · 96% Database system architecture and tuning · 4%

Topics — the 12 heaviest of 13, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Data models and query languages
object-oriented database
0.112008
Genericity in Java: persistent and database systems implications · VLDB J. 2008
Programming languages and type systems
type systems
0.021999
Type-Checking OQL Queries In the ODMG Type Systems · ACM Trans. Database Syst. 1999
The ODMG Object Model: Does it Make Sense? · OOPSLA 1997
Programming languages and type systems
language semantics
0.012000
Semantics of Temporal Classes · Inf. Comput. 2000
Programming languages and type systems › type systems › polymorphism
generics
0.012008
Genericity in Java: persistent and database systems implications · VLDB J. 2008
Data models and query languages
object-oriented data model
0.011999
Type-Checking OQL Queries In the ODMG Type Systems · ACM Trans. Database Syst. 1999
Data models and query languages › query language
object-oriented query language
0.011999
Type-Checking OQL Queries In the ODMG Type Systems · ACM Trans. Database Syst. 1999
Programming languages and type systems › type systems › polymorphism › parametric polymorphism
bounded polymorphism
0.011999
Type-Checking OQL Queries In the ODMG Type Systems · ACM Trans. Database Syst. 1999
Programming languages and type systems › type systems › polymorphism
parametric polymorphism
0.011998
Parametric Polymorphism for Java: A Reflective Solution · OOPSLA 1998
Data models and query languages
object model
0.011997
The ODMG Object Model: Does it Make Sense? · OOPSLA 1997
Programming languages and type systems
type checking
0.011997
The ODMG Object Model: Does it Make Sense? · OOPSLA 1997
Logic in computer science
temporal logic
0.012000
Semantics of Temporal Classes · Inf. Comput. 2000
Programming languages and type systems › metaprogramming
reflection
0.011998
Parametric Polymorphism for Java: A Reflective Solution · OOPSLA 1998

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

type theory · 0.0f-bounded polymorphism · 0.0formal system · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2008 Genericity in Java: persistent and database systems implications
Suad Alagic, Mark Royer
VLDB J.1
2002 Behavioral Compatibility of Self-Typed Theories
Suad Alagic, Svetlana Kouznetsova
ECOOP1
2002 Institutions: Integrating Objects, XML and Databases
Suad Alagic
Inf. Softw. Technol.1
2000 Temporal Object-Oriented Programming
abstract
An object-oriented, declarative, statically typed and temporal language system is presented. What makes this system very different from the currently prevailing strongly typed procedural object-oriented language systems is that methods are specified in a high-level, constraint sublanguage. The constraint sublanguage is based on a particular temporal paradigm, which has an execution model as well as the formal, initial model semantics. This constraint language system is seen as a non-traditional component of a sophisticated, typed object-oriented programming environment. It complements the procedural object-oriented languages in the areas of prototyping, simulation and databases. The paper covers the core ideas, the programming methodology, the type system, and the implementation techniques. Possible concurrent extensions and the limitations of the system are also discussed.
Suad Alagic
Comput. J.1
2000 Semantics of Temporal Classes
Suad Alagic
Inf. Comput.1
1999 A Family of the ODMG Object Models
Suad Alagic
ADBIS1
1999 Type-Checking OQL Queries In the ODMG Type Systems
abstract
Several negative results are proved about the ability to type-check queries in the only existing proposed standard for object-oriented databases. The first of these negative results is that it is not possible to type-check OQL queries in the type system underlying the ODMG object model and its definition language ODL. The second negative result is that OQL queries cannot be type-checked in the type system of the Java binding of the ODMG standard either. A solution proposed in this paper is to extend the ODMG object model with explicit support for parametric polymorphism (universal type quantification). These results show that Java cannot be a viable database programming language unless extended with parametric polymorphism. This is why type-checking OQL queries presents no problem for the type system of the C++ binding of the ODMG standard. However, a type system that is strictly more powerful than any of the type systems of the ODMG standard is required in order to properly type ordered collectgions and indices. The required form of polymorphism is bounded type quantification (constrained genericity) and even F-bounded polymorphism. A further result is that neither static nor the standard dynamic object-oriented type-checking is possible for Java OQL, in spite of the fact that Java OQL combines features of two strongly and mostly statically-typed languages. Contrary to one of the promises of object-oriented database technology, this result shows that the impedance mismatch does not disappear in the ODMG standard. A type-safe reflective technique is proposed for overcoming this mismatch.
Suad Alagic
ACM Trans. Database Syst.1
1998 Orthogonal to the Java Imperative
Suad Alagic, Jose Solorzano, David Gitchell
ECOOP1
1998 Parametric Polymorphism for Java: A Reflective Solution
abstract
A number of inadequacies of existing implementation techniques for extending Java™ with parametric polymorphism are revealed. Homogeneous translations are the most space-efficient but they are not compatible with reflection, some models of persistence, and multiple dispatch. Heterogeneous translations, on the other hand, can potentially produce large amounts of redundant information. Implementation techniques that address these concerns are developed. In languages that support run-time reflection, an adequate implementation of parametric, bounded and F-bounded polymorphism is shown to require (reflective) run-time support. In Java, extensions to the core classes are needed. This is in spite of the fact that parametric polymorphism is intended to be managed statically.
Jose Solorzano, Suad Alagic
OOPSLA2
1997 The ODMG Object Model: Does it Make Sense?
abstract
The ODMG Object Model is shown to have a number of problems. A major confusion is caused by the intended type of polymorphism and the way it is expressed in the Model. Dynamic type checking is required even in situations when static type checking is possible. There are situations in which there is no way that type checking can determine whether a particular construct is type correct or not. The model of persistence in the ODMG Standard is not orthogonal, which has undesirable pragmatic consequences on complex objects. The discrepancies between the ODMG Object Model and the particular language bindings of the ODMG Standard are non-trivial. This paper presents solutions to some of these problems together with the associated formal system. Without such a formal system the recommended ODMG bindings are open to a wide range of different, and sometimes confusing interpretations. The criticism expressed in the paper is intended to be helpful in developing future releases of the ODMG Standard.
Suad Alagic
OOPSLA1
1997 Order-Sorted Model Theory for Temporal Executable Specifications
Suad Alagic, Mara Alagic
Theor. Comput. Sci.1
1994 Declarative Object-Oriented Programming: Inheritance, Subtyping and Prototyping
Suad Alagic, Rajshekhar Sunderraman, Rajiv Bagai
ECOOP1
1981 Relational Pascal Data Base Interface
abstract
The modification of Pascal proposed in the paper is based on the relation type which combines the properties of the set type and the file type of Pascal and includes properly these two Pascal types. The relation type is equipped with both high level (set oriented) relational operations and low level primitives for operating on particular tuples of relations. Within the relational framework a novel and unified treatment of images and base relations is given. This approach permits isolation of those issues in optimisation and decomposition which can be treated independently of the details of the procedural decomposition, clarifies and simplifies the decomposition problem. The proposed programming language is smaller and simpler than Pascal and still very powerful in handling relational data bases. Examples of nonprocedural and procedural decomposition are presented in order to demonstrate the suitability of the proposed features and their implications on the architecture of the supporting system.
Suad Alagic, Adnan Kulenovic
Comput. J.1
1979 Proof Rules for Gotos
Michael A. Arbib, Suad Alagic
Acta Informatica2
1976 Structured extension of COBOL for handling data bases
Suad Alagic, Adnan Kulenovic, Muhamed Darajlic
Inf. Syst.1
1975 Natural State Transformations
Suad Alagic
J. Comput. Syst. Sci.1