Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED!nerds-end
From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Subject: RE: Formatting of Language LRMs
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 09:06:23 +0000
Organization: Compilers Central
Lines: 13
Sender: news@iecc.com
Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID: <14-07-004@comp.compilers>
References: <14-06-010@comp.compilers> <14-06-016@comp.compilers> <14-06-021@comp.compilers>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.iecc.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: miucha.iecc.com 1404449747 80906 2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970 (4 Jul 2014 04:55:47 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@iecc.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2014 04:55:47 +0000 (UTC)
Keywords: semantics, question
Posted-Date: 04 Jul 2014 00:55:47 EDT
X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com
Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:1294

> getting the feeling that the start of the art
> in executable semantics is such that we
> could start seeing languages written as
> executable semantics in maybe 10-20 years
> or so.

What are "executable semantics"?

If I were to create a document containing executable semantics, what would I do with it? How would it differ from a document containing, say, Java?

Fascinating discussion - thanks!

/Roger