Parallel execution of an equational language

  • Bharat Jayaraman
  • Gopal Gupta
Relationship To Logic Programming
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 279)


Logic Programming Operational Semantic Logic Language Functional Language Variable Binding 
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. [CK81]
    J. S. Conery and D. F. Kibler, “Parallel Interpretation of Logic Programs,” In Conf. Functional Prog. Lang. and Comp. Arch., ACM, 1981, pp. 163–170.Google Scholar
  2. [CK85]
    J. S. Conery and D. F. Kibler, “AND Parallelism and Nondeterminism in Logic Programs,” New Generation Computing, vol. 3, 1985, pp. 43–70.Google Scholar
  3. [CM81]
    W. F. Clocksin and C. S. Mellish, Programming in Prolog, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1981.Google Scholar
  4. [CG86]
    K. Clark and S. Gregory, “PARLOG: Parallel Programming in Logic,” TOPLAS, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–49.Google Scholar
  5. [D83]
    J. Darlington, “Unifying Functional and Logic Languages,” Internal Report, Imperial College, London, 1983.Google Scholar
  6. [DP85]
    N. Dershowitz and D. A. Plaisted, “Applicative Programming cum Logic Programming,” In 1985 Symp. on Logic Programming, Boston, pp. 54–66.Google Scholar
  7. [F84]
    L. Fribourg, “Oriented Equational Clauses as a Programming Language,” J. Logic Prog. 2 (1984) pp. 165–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [GM84]
    J. A. Goguen and J. Meseguer, “Equality, Types, Modules, and (Why Not?) Generics for Logic Programming,” J. Logic Prog. 2 (1984) pp. 179–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [H80]
    J-M. Hullot, “Canonical Forms and Unification,” In Proc. 5th Workshop on Automated Deduction, Springer Lecture Notes, 1980, pp. 318–334.Google Scholar
  10. [HC83]
    S. Haridi and A. Ciepielewski, “An OR-Parallel Token Machine,” Tech. Report No. TRITA-CS-8303, Royal Inst. of Tech., May 1983.Google Scholar
  11. [J84]
    B. Jayaraman, “An Equational Language and its Evaluator,” TR-CS-84-11, Department of Computer Science, Univ. of N. Carolina, December 1984.Google Scholar
  12. [JS86]
    B. Jayaraman and F.S.K. Silbermann, “Equations, Sets, and Reduction Semantics for Functional and Logic Programming,” In 1986 ACM Conf. on LISP and Functional Programming, pp. 320–331, Boston, August 1986.Google Scholar
  13. [JSG86]
    B. Jayaraman, F.S.K. Silbermann, G. Gupta, “Equational Programming: A Unifying Approach to Functional and Logic Programming,” In Int'l Conf. on Computer Languages, pp. 47–57, Miami Beach, October 1986.Google Scholar
  14. [L84]
    G. Lindstrom, “OR-Parallelism on Applicative Architectures,” In Second Intl. Conf. on Logic Programming, Uppsala, July 1984.Google Scholar
  15. [M82]
    C. S. Mellish, “An Alternative to Structure Sharing in the Implementation of a PROLOG Interpreter,” In Logic Programming, Ed. K. L. Clark and S.-A. Tärnlund, Academic Press, 1982, pp. 99–106.Google Scholar
  16. [O85]
    M. J. O'Donnell, “Equational Logic as a Programming Language,” M.I.T. Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  17. [O85b]
    R. Onai, et al, “Architecture of a Reduction-based Parallel Inference Engine: PIMR,” In New Generation Computing, vol. 3, 1985, pp. 197–228.Google Scholar
  18. [R85]
    U. S. Reddy, “Narrowing as the Operational Semantics of Functional Languages,” In 1985 Symp. on Logic Programming, Boston, 1985, pp. 138–151.Google Scholar
  19. [RS82]
    J. A. Robinson and E. E. Sibert, “LOGLISP: Motivation, Design, and Implementation,” In Logic Programming, Ed. K. L. Clark and S.-A. Tärnlund, Academic Press, 1982, pp. 299–313.Google Scholar
  20. [SY84]
    P. A. Subrahmanyam and J-H. You, “Pattern-driven Lazy Reduction: A Unifying Evaluation Mechanism for Functional and Logical Programs,” In 11th ACM POPL, Salt Lake City, 1984, pp. 228–234.Google Scholar
  21. [WPP77]
    D. H. D. Warren, F. Pereira, and L. M. Pereira, “Prolog: the Language and its Implementation Compared with LISP,” SIGPLAN Notices 12, No. 8 (1977) pp. 109–115.Google Scholar
  22. [YS86]
    J-H. You and P. A. Subrahmanyam, “Equational Logic Programming: an Extension to Equational Programming,” In 13th ACM POPL, St. Petersburg, 1986, pp. 209–218.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bharat Jayaraman
    • 1
  • Gopal Gupta
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel Hill

Personalised recommendations