Thanks much Kristopher, Gershom, and Aaron, for the excellent pointers. (Keep them coming, anyone else - maybe we can update the wiki..) I will look into them in more detail soon.
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:12 PM, Aaron Tomb <aaront...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Last summer, as part of the Summer of Code, David Lazar formalized a > significant portion of Haskell 98 in the K framework. You can find the > code here: > > https://github.com/davidlazar/haskell-semantics > > And there's a talk about it here: > > > http://corp.galois.com/blog/2012/1/12/new-tech-talk-video-formalizing-haskell-98-in-the-k-semantic.html > > I think David is working from essentially the same goals you have in mind. > > Aaron > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Ramana Kumar <ramana.ku...@cl.cam.ac.uk> > wrote: > > Dear Haskell Cafe > > > > I'm looking for information on past and current attempts to write > semantics > > for Haskell. > > Features I'm particularly interested in are: > > > > formal > > mechanised > > maintainable > > up to date > > > > Of course, if nothing like that exists then partial attempts towards it > > could still be useful. > > > > My ultimate aims include: > > > > Make it viable to define Haskell formally (i.e. so mechanised semantics > can > > take over the normative role of the Haskell reports). > > Write a verified (or verify an existing) Haskell compiler (where verified > > means semantics preserving). > > > > Cheers, > > Ramana > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > > >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe