Re: What's the word for...

sasghm@unx.sas.com (Gary Merrill)
Mon, 21 Feb 1994 15:22:47 GMT

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[6 earlier articles]
Re: What's the word for... marcoj@iro.umontreal.ca (Marco Jacques) (1994-02-18)
Re: What's the word for... galibero@mines.u-nancy.fr (1994-02-18)
Re: What's the word for... glockner@cosc.bsu.umd.edu (Alexander Glockner) (1994-02-18)
Re: What's the word for... norman@flaubert.bellcore.com (1994-02-19)
Re: What's the word for... tchannon@black.demon.co.uk (1994-02-20)
Re: What's the word for... moreaux@litsun31.epfl.ch (1994-02-20)
Re: What's the word for... sasghm@unx.sas.com (1994-02-21)
Re: What's the word for... weberwu@tfh-berlin.de (1994-02-21)
Re: What's the word for... jan@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de (1994-02-22)
Re: What's the word for... andrewd@apanix.apana.org.au (1994-02-22)
Re: What's the word for... muysers@capsogeti.fr (1994-02-23)
Re: What's the word for... sasghm@unx.sas.com (1994-02-23)
Re: What's the word for... lloyd@bruce.cs.monash.edu.au (1994-02-24)
| List of all articles for this month |

Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: sasghm@unx.sas.com (Gary Merrill)
Originator: sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com
Keywords: theory, bibliography
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.
References: 94-02-106 94-02-131
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 1994 15:22:47 GMT

> Could someone please tell me what the word is for a language
> which can be written in itself?


Marco Jacques <marcoj@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
|> I don't know if this is you're looking for, but there's the notion of a
|> reflective language. A reflective language is a language which incorporates
|> structures represting itself ( introspection ). It's possible to examine or
|> modify thoses structures. Then, it's possible to examine or modify the
|> semantics of suchs languages.


Following Tarski, a language that is capable of describing its own syntax
and semantics is called "semantically closed". There are dangers to such
languages, of course. If a language is semantically closed and the
"normal" laws of logic hold for it, it is possible to construct within it
one or more of the semantic paradoxes (Liar, Grelling-Nelson, etc.). I do
not believe that the notion of a semantically closed language is exactly
what is desired in this thread. I have the feeling that there is a good
answer somewhere in Quine's stuff (I'm thinking along the lines of
protosyntax), but I haven't had a chance to check this out yet.


--
Gary H. Merrill [Principal Systems Developer, Compiler and Tools Division]
SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Dr. / Cary, NC 27513 / (919) 677-8000
sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com ... !mcnc!sas!sasghm
--


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.