Denotational Semantics: A Methodology for Language Development
by David Schmidt
Publisher: Kansas State University 2009
Number of pages: 304
Denotational semantics is a methodology for giving mathematical meaning to programming languages and systems. It was developed by Christopher Strachey's Programming Research Group at Oxford University in the 1960s. The method combines mathematical rigor, due to the work of Dana Scott, with notational elegance, due to Strachey. Originally used as an analysis tool, denotational semantics has grown in use as a tool for language design and implementation. This book was written to make denotational semantics accessible to a wider audience and to update existing texts in the area. It presents the topic from an engineering viewpoint, emphasizing the descriptional and implementational aspects. The relevant mathematics is also included, for it gives rigor and validity to the method and provides a foundation for further research.
Home page url
Download or read it online for free here:
by Gary Hardegree - UMass Amherst
Contents: Basic Categorial Syntax; Shortcomings of Standard Categorial Syntax; Expanded Categorial Syntax; Examples of Expanded Categorial Syntax; Categorial Logic; Basic Categorial Semantics; Lambda-Abstraction; Expanded Categorial Semantics; etc.
This book is an attempt to describe a bit of the programming languages zoo. We use each of the particular languages to introduce fundamental notions related to the design and the implementation of general purpose programming languages.
by Bill Hails
This book presents an informal and friendly introduction to some of the core ideas in modern computer science, using the programming language Perl as its vehicle. The book takes the form of a series of working interpreters for the language PScheme.
by J. Girard, Y. Lafont, P. Taylor - Cambridge University Press
This little book comes from a short graduate course on typed lambda-calculus given at the Universite Paris. It is not intended to be encyclopedic and the selection of topics was really quite haphazard. Some very basic knowledge of logic is needed.