Semantics of interference control

  • R. D. Tennent
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 140)


Semantic Model Operational Semantic Semantic Description Denotational Semantic Standard Semantic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    C.A.R.Hoare, Hints on Programming Language Design, technical report CS-403, Computer Science Dept., Stanford university, Stanford, California (1973).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P.Brinch Hansen, “Structured multiprogramming”, Comm. ACM 15, 7, pp. 574–8 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    N.Wirth, “On the design of programming languages,” in Proc. IFIP Congress 74 (ed., J.L.Rosenfeld), Narth-Holland, Amsterdam (1975).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J.C.Reynolds, “Syntactic control of interference,” Conf. Record Fifth ACM Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 39–46, ACM, New York (1978).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    C.A.R.Hoare, “Procedures and parameters, an axiomatic approach,” in Symposium on Semantics of Algorithmic Languages (ed., E.Engeler), Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 188, Springer, Berlin (1971).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J.C.Reynolds, The Craft of Programming, Prentice-Hall International, London (1981).zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    R.D.Tennent, Principles of Programming Languages, Prentice-Hall International, London (1981).zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    M.J.C.Gordon, The Denotational Description of Programming Languages, Springer, New York (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J.E.Stoy, Denotational Semantics: The Scott-Strachey Approach to Programming Language theory, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1977).zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J.E.Donahue, “Locations considered unnecessary”, Acta Inf., 8, pp. 221–242 (1977).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    R.E.Milne and C. Strachey, A Theory of Programming Language Semantics, Chapman and Hall, London, and Wiley, New York (1976).zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R.E.Milne, The Formal Semantics of Computer Languages and their Implementations (thesis), university of Cambridge (1974); also Technical Microfiche PRG-13, Programming Research Group, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J.C.Reynolds, “On the relation between direct and continuation semantics”, pp. 141–56, Proc. Second Int. Coll. on Automata, Languages, and Programming, Saarbrucken, Springer, Berlin: (1974).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    P.Henderson and J.H.Morris, “A lazy evaluator”, Conf. Racord Third ACM Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 95–103, ACM, New York (1978).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D.P.Friedman and D.S.Wise, “CONS should not evaluate its arguments”, Third Int. Coll. on Automata, Languages and Programming, pp. 257–84, Edinburgh University Press (1976).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    C.P.Wadsworth, Semantics and Pragmatics of the Lambda Calculus (thesis), university of Oxford (1971).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J.C.Reynolds, “The essence of Algol”, Int. Symp. on Algorithmic Languages, Oct. 26–29, 1981, Amsterdam, (deBakker and vanVliet, eds.), North-Holland, Amsterdam (1982).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    M. Gordon, R.Milner and C. Wadsworth, Edinburgh LCF, Lecture Nates in Computer Science, vol. 78, Springer, Berlin (1979).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    J.C.Reynolds, Idealized Algol and its Specification Logic, technical report, School of Computer and Information Science, Syracuse University, Syracuse, N.Y. (1981).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. D. Tennent
    • 1
  1. 1.Computing and Information ScienceQueen's UniversityKingstonCanada

Personalised recommendations