RAPT: A Program Transformation System Based on Term Rewriting

  • Yuki Chiba
  • Takahito Aoto
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4098)

Abstract

Chiba et al. (2005) proposed a framework of program transformation by template based on term rewriting in which correctness of the transformation is verified automatically. This paper describes RAPT (Rewriting-based Automated Program Transformation system) which implements this framework.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baader, F., Nipkow, T.: Term Rewriting and All That. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bundy, A.: The automation of proof by mathematical induction. In: Handbook of Automated Reasoning, ch. 13, pp. 845–911. Elsevier and MIT Press (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burstall, R.M., Darlington, J.: A transformation system for developing recursive programs. Journal of the ACM 24(1), 44–67 (1977)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chiba, Y., Aoto, T., Toyama, Y.: Program transformation by templates based on term rewriting. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM-SIGPLAN International Conference on Principles and Practice of Declarative Programming (PPDP 2005), pp. 59–69. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Comon, H.: Inductionless induction. In: Handbook of Automated Reasoning, ch. 14, pp. 913–962. Elsevier and MIT Press (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    de Moor, O., Sittampalam, G.: Higher-order matching for program transformation. Theoretical Computer Science 269, 135–162 (2001)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hirokawa, N., Middeldorp, A.: Tsukuba termination tool. In: Nieuwenhuis, R. (ed.) RTA 2003. LNCS, vol. 2706, pp. 311–320. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huet, G., Lang, B.: Proving and applying program transformations expressed with second order patterns. Acta Informatica 11, 31–55 (1978)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kapur, D., Narendran, P., Zhang, H.: On sufficient-completeness and related properties of term rewriting systems. Acta Informatica 24(4), 395–415 (1987)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lazrek, A., Lescanne, P., Thiel, J.J.: Tools for proving inductive equalities, relative completeness, and ω-completeness. Information and Computation 84, 47–70 (1990)CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nipkow, T., Weikum, G.: A decidability result about sufficient-completeness of axiomatically specified abstract data types. In: Cremers, A.B., Kriegel, H.-P. (eds.) GI-TCS 1983. LNCS, vol. 145, pp. 257–268. Springer, Heidelberg (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Paige, R.: Future directions in program transformations. ACM Computing Surveys 28(4es), 170 (1996)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Partsch, H., Steinbrüggen, R.: Program transformation systems. ACM Computing Surveys 15(3), 199–236 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Reddy, U.S.: Term rewriting induction. In: Stickel, M.E. (ed.) CADE 1990. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 449, pp. 162–177. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sittampalam, G.: Higher-Order Matching for Program Transformation. PhD thesis, Magdalen College (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wadler, P.: Deforestation: Transforming programs to eliminate trees. Theoretical Computer Science 73, 231–248 (1990)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuki Chiba
    • 1
  • Takahito Aoto
    • 1
  1. 1.Research Institute of Electrical CommunicationTohoku UniversityJapan

Personalised recommendations