The definition of Standard ML
Separate compilation for Standard ML
PLDI '94 Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 1994 conference on Programming language design and implementation
Communications of the ACM
A formalism for translator interactions
Communications of the ACM
A alternate form of the “UNCOL diagram”
Communications of the ACM
Using modern mathematics as an FOSD modeling language
GPCE '08 Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Generative programming and component engineering
Self-certification: bootstrapping certified typecheckers in F* with Coq
POPL '12 Proceedings of the 39th annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages
Bootstrapping software distributions
Proceedings of the 16th International ACM Sigsoft symposium on Component-based software engineering
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
If a compiler for language L is implemented in L, then it should be able to compile itself. But for systems used interactively commands are compiled and immediately executed, and these commands may invoke the compiler; so there is the question of how ever to cross-compile for another architecture. Also, where the compiler writes binary files of static type information that must then be read in by the bootstrapped interactive compiler, how can one ever change the format of digested type information in binary files?Here I attempt an axiomatic clarification of the bootstrapping technique, using Standard ML of New Jersey as a case study. This should be useful to implementors of any self-applicable interactive compiler with nontrivial object-file and runtime-system compatibility problems.