- Gambit-list - mailman.iro.umontreal.ca

<Programming> 2017: Call for workshop, symposium & poster submissions
by Tim Molderez 06 Jan '17

06 Jan '17

----------------------------------------------------------------------- <Programming> 2017 : The Art, Science, and Engineering of Programming April 3-6, 2017, Brussels, Belgium http://2017.programming-conference.org ----------------------------------------------------------------------- We are excited to announce there will be 10 co-located events at the <Programming> 2017 conference (and more to come!): - LASSY 2017 - 2nd Workshop on Live Adaptation of Software SYstems - MOMO 2017 - 2nd Workshop on Modularity in Modelling - MoreVMs 2017 - 1st Workshop on Modern Language Runtimes, Ecosystems, and VMs - PASS 2017 - 1st Workshop on Programming Across the System Stack - PX 2017 - 2nd Workshop on Programming Experience - ProWeb 2017 - 1st Workshop on Programming Technology for the Future Web - Salon des Refusés 2017 - 1st edition of the Salon des Refusés workshop - ELS 2017 - 10th European Lisp Symposium - Modularity 2017 Invited talks - International Symposium on Modularity - ACM Student Research Competition / <Programming> 2017 Posters All co-located events will take place during April 3-4 2017. CFPs for each of these events are listed below. (apart from Modularity 2017, which is invitation-based) ****************************************************************** LASSY 2017 - 2nd Workshop on Live Adaptation of Software SYstems Submissions: Fri 3 Feb 2017 Notifications: Fri 3 Mar 2017 http://2017.programming-conference.org/track/LASSY-2017-papers ****************************************************************** When developing current-day software systems, their deployment and usage environments should be considered carefully, in order to understand the adaptations those systems might need to undergo to interact with other systems and with their environment. Moreover, due to the portability, mobility and increasingly evolutionary nature of software systems, such adaptations should be enacted even while the system is running. Developing such software systems can prove challenging, and many seemingly different techniques to address this concern have been proposed over the last couple of years. The intention of the LASSY workshop is to congregate all topics relevant to dynamic adaptation and run-time evolution of software systems, ranging from a computer science perspective covering the domains of programming languages, model-driven software development, software and service composition, context-aware databases, software variability, requirements engineering, UI adaptation and other domains, to a human perspective covering sociological or ethical implications of dynamic software systems. The workshop provides a space for discussion and collaboration between researchers working on the problem of enabling live adaptations to software systems, across the development stack. Topics of Interest: * Design and Implementation of Live Adaptive Software Systems * Context-, aspect-, feature-, role- and agent-oriented programming * Context representation and discovery * Context-aware model-driven software development * Context-aware data management * Software variability and dynamic product lines * Self-adaptive, self-explanatory systems * Inconsistency management, verification, and validation * Middleware and Runtime of Live Adaptive Software Systems * Dynamic software evolution, upgrades and configuration * Dynamic software and service composition mechanisms * Dynamic software architecture and middleware approaches * Dynamic user interface adaptation and multimodal user interfaces * Impact and Assessment of Live Adaptive Software Systems * User acceptance and usability issues * Human, sociological, ethical and legal aspects * Privacy and security aspects of dynamic adaptability * Live adaptation in smart environments (e.g. smart rooms, smart robot cells, smart factories, smart cities) * Self-adaptation and emergence in SoS and CPSoS **************************************************************** MOMO 2017 - 2nd Workshop on Modularity in Modelling Abstract submissions (optional): Sun Jan 29 2017 Paper submissions: Sun Feb 5 2017 Notifications: Wed Feb 22 2017 http://www.momo2017.ece.mcgill.ca/cfp.htm **************************************************************** Extending the time-honored practice of separation of concerns, Model-Driven Engineering (MDE) promotes the use of separate models to address the various concerns in the development of complex software-intensive systems. The main objective is to choose the right level of abstraction to modularize a concern, specify its properties and reason about the system under development depending on stakeholder and development needs. While some of these models can be defined with a single modelling language, a variety of heterogeneous models and languages are typically used in the various phases of software development. Furthermore, Domain-Specific Modelling Languages designed to address particular concerns are also increasingly used. Despite the power of abstraction of modelling, models of real-world problems and systems quickly grow to such an extent that managing the complexity by using proper modularization techniques becomes necessary. As a result, many (standard) modelling notations have been extended with aspect-oriented mechanisms and advanced composition operators to support advanced separation of concerns, to combine (possibly heterogeneous) models modularizing different concerns, to execute an application based on modularized models, and to reason over global properties of modularized models. The Second International Modularity in Modelling Workshop brings together researchers and practitioners interested in the theoretical and practical challenges resulting from applying modularity, advanced separation of concerns, and advanced composition at the modelling level. It is intended to provide a forum for presenting new ideas and discussing the impact of the use of modularization in the context of MDE at different levels of abstraction. We are interested in submissions on all topics related to modularity and modelling including but not limited to: * Modularization Support in Modelling Languages and Tools * Model Interfaces * Homogeneous Model Composition Operators * Heterogeneous Model Composition Operators * Visualization of Modularized and Composed Models * Effects of Using Modularization and Composition in Modelling * On Verification and Validation * On Reuse * On the Model-Driven Software Development Process (Requirements Engineering, Software Architecture, Software Design, Implementation) * On Maintenance * Experience Reports / Empirical Evaluations of Applying Modularization and Composition in Modelling * Feature-Oriented, Aspect-Oriented and Concern-Oriented Modelling * Modularization support and composition operators for specific modelling notations * Modelling essential characteristics of specific (crosscutting) concerns * Multi-View Modelling: avoiding inconsistencies, avoiding Redundancies * Support for Detecting and/or Resolution of Feature Interactions * Domain-Specific Modelling * Modularization for Domain-Specific Languages * Composition for Domain-Specific Languages * Domain-specific Aspect Models ****************************************************************************** MoreVMs 2017 - 1st Workshop on Modern Language Runtimes, Ecosystems, and VMs Submissions: Wed 15 Feb 2017 Notifications: Wed 1 Mar 2017 http://2017.programming-conference.org/track/MoreVMs-2017-papers ****************************************************************************** The main goal of the workshop is to bring together both researchers and practitioners and facilitate effective sharing of their respective experiences and ideas on how languages and runtimes are utilized and where they need to improve further. We welcome presentation proposals in the form of extended abstracts discussing experiences, work-in-progress, as well as future visions from the academic as well as industrial perspective. Relevant topics include, but are definitely not limited to, the following: * Extensible VM design (compiler- or interpreter-based VMs) * Reusable runtime components (e.g. interpreters, garbage collectors, intermediate representations) * Static and dynamic compiler techniques * Techniques for compilation to high-level languages such as JavaScript * Runtimes and mechanisms for interoperability between languages * Tooling support (e.g. debugging, profiling, etc.) * Programming language development environments and virtual machines * Case studies of existing language implementations, virtual machines, and runtime components (e.g. design choices, tradeoffs, etc.) * Language implementation challenges and trade-offs (e.g. performance, completeness, etc.) * Surveys and applications usage reports to understand runtime usage in the wild * Surveys on frameworks and their impact on runtime usage * New research ideas on how we want to build languages in the future ************************************************************************** PASS 2017 - 1st Workshop on Programming Across the System Stack Submissions: Mon 13 Feb 2017 Notifications: Mon 27 Feb 2017 http://2017.programming-conference.org/track/PASS-2017 ************************************************************************** The landscape of computation platforms has changed dramatically in recent years. Emerging systems - such as wearable devices, smartphones, unmanned aerial vehicles, Internet of things, cloud computing servers, heterogeneous clusters, and data centers - pose a distinct set of system-oriented challenges ranging from data throughput, energy efficiency, security, real-time guarantees, to high performance. In the meantime, code quality, such as modularity or extensibility, remains a cornerstone in modern software engineering, bringing in crucial benefits such as modular reasoning, program understanding, and collaborative software development. Current methodologies and software development technologies should be revised in order to produce software to meet system-oriented goals, while preserving high internal code quality. The role of the Software Engineer is essential, having to be aware of the implications that each design, architecture and implementation decision has on the application system ecosystem. This workshop is driven by one fundamental question: How does internal code quality interact with system-oriented goals? We welcome both positive and negative responses to this question. An example of the former would be modular reasoning systems specifically designed to promote system-oriented goals, whereas an example of the latter would be anti-patterns against system-oriented goals during software development. Areas of interest include but are not limited to: * Energy-aware software engineering (e.g. energy efficiency models, energy efficiency as a quality attribute) * Modularity support (e.g., programming language design, development tools or verification) for applications in resource-constrained or real-time systems * Emerging platforms (e.g., Internet of Things and wearable devices) * Security support (e.g., compositional information flow, compositional program analysis) * Software architecture for reusability and adaptability in systems and their interactions with applications * Empirical studies (patterns and anti-patterns) on the relationship between internal code quality and system-oriented goals * Software engineering techniques to balance the trade-off between internal code quality and efficiency * Memory bloats and long-tail performance problems across modular boundaries * Program optimization across modular boundaries * Internal code quality in systems software * Reasoning across applications, compilers, and virtual machines **************************************************************** PX 2017 - 2nd Programming Experience Workshop Submissions: Sat 4 Feb 2017 Notifications: Mon 27 Feb 2017 http://programming-experience.org/px17 **************************************************************** Imagine a software development task: some sort of requirements and specification including performance goals and perhaps a platform and programming language. A group of developers head into a vast workroom. In that room they discover they need to explore the domain and the nature of potential solutions—they need exploratory programming. The Programming Experience Workshop is about what happens in that room when one or a couple of programmers sit down in front of computers and produce code, especially when it’s exploratory programming. Do they create text that is transformed into running behavior (the old way), or do they operate on behavior directly (“liveness”); are they exploring the live domain to understand the true nature of the requirements; are they like authors creating new worlds; does visualization matter; is the experience immediate, immersive, vivid and continuous; do fluency, literacy, and learning matter; do they build tools, meta-tools; are they creating languages to express new concepts quickly and easily; and curiously, is joy relevant to the experience? Correctness, performance, standard tools, foundations, and text-as-program are important traditional research areas, but the experience of programming and how to improve and evolve it are the focus of this workshop, and in this edition we would like to focus on exploratory programming. The technical topics include: * Exploratory programming * Live programming * Authoring * Representation of active content * Visualization * Navigation * Modularity mechanisms * Immediacy * Literacy * Fluency * Learning * Tool building * Language engineering ************************************************************************* ProWeb 2017 - 1st Workshop on Programming Technology for the Future Web Submissions: Wed 15 Feb 2017 Notifications: Wed 1 Mar 2017 http://2017.programming-conference.org/track/proweb-2017-papers ************************************************************************* Full-fledged web applications have become ubiquitous on desktop and mobile devices alike. Whereas “responsive” web applications already offered a more desktop-like experience, there is an increasing demand for “rich” web applications (RIAs) that offer collaborative and even off-line functionality —Google docs being the prototypical example. Long gone are the days that web servers merely had to answer incoming HTTP request with a block of static HTML. Today’s servers react to a continuous stream of events coming from JavaScript applications that have been pushed to clients. As a result, application logic and data is increasingly distributed. Traditional dichotomies such as “client vs. server” and “offline vs. online” are fading. The 1st International Workshop on Programming Technology for the Future Web, or ProWeb17, is a forum for researchers and practitioners to share and discuss new technology for programming these and future evolutions of the web. We welcome submissions introducing programming technology (i.e., frameworks, libraries, programming languages, program analyses and development tools) for implementing web applications and for maintaining their quality over time, as well as experience reports about the use of state-of-the-art programming technology. Relevant topics include, but are not limited to: * Quality on the new web: static and dynamic program analyses; code, design test and process metrics; development and migration tools; automated testing and test generation; contract systems, type systems, and web service API conformance checking; … * Hosting languages on the web: new runtimes; transpilation or compilation to JavaScript, WebAssembly, asm.js, … * Designing languages for the web: multi-tier (or tierless) programming; reactive programming; frameworks for multi-tier or reactive programming on the web; … * Distributed data sharing, replication and consistency: cloud types, CRDTs, eventual consistency, offline storage, peer-to-peer communication, … * Security on the web: client-side and server-side security policies; policy enforcement; proxies and membranes; vulnerability detection; dynamic patching, … * Surveys and case studies using state-of-the-art web technology (e.g., WebAssembly, WebSocket, LocalStorage, AppCache, ServiceWorkers, Meteor, deepstream.io, Angular.js, React and React Native, Swarm.js, Caja, TypeScript, Proxies, ClojureScript, Amber Smalltalk, Scala.js, …) * Ideas on and experience reports about: how to reconcile the need for quality with the need for agility on the web; how to master and combine the myriad of tier-specific technologies required to develop a web application, … * Position statements on what the future of the web will look like **************************************************************** Salon des Refusés 2017 Submissions: Wed 1 Feb 2017 Notifications: Fri 17 Feb 2017 https://refuses.github.io **************************************************************** Salon des Refusés (“exhibition of rejects”) was an 1863 exhibition of artworks rejected from the official Paris Salon. The jury of Paris Salon required near-photographic realism and classified works according to a strict genre hierarchy. Paintings by many, later famous, modernists such as Édouard Manet were rejected and appeared in what became known as the Salon des Refusés. This workshop aims to be the programming language research equivalent of Salon des Refusés. We provide a venue for exploring new ideas and new ways of doing computer science. Many interesting ideas about programming might struggle to find space in the modern programming language research community, often because they are difficult to evaluate using established evaluation methods (be it proofs, measurements or controlled user studies). As a result, new ideas are often seen as “unscientific”. This workshop provides a venue where such interesting and thought-provoking ideas can be exposed to critical evaluation. Submissions that provoke interesting discussion among the program committee members will be published together with an attributed review that presents an alternative position, develops additional context or summarizes discussion from the workshop. This means of engaging with papers not just enables explorations of novel programming ideas, but also encourages new ways of doing computer science. Topics of interest The scope of the workshop is determined more by the format of submissions than by the specific area of programming language or computer science research that we are interested in. We welcome submissions in a format that makes it possible to think about programming in a new way, including, but not limited to: * Thought experiments – we believe that thought experiments, analogies and illustrative metaphors can provide novel insights and inspire fruitful programming language ideas. * Experimentation – we find prejudices in favour of theory, as far back as there is institutionalized science, but programming can often be seen more as experimentation than as theorizing. We welcome interesting experiments even if there is yet no overarching theory that explains why they happened. * Paradigms – all scientific work is rooted in a scientific paradigm that frame what questions can be asked. We encourage submissions that reflect on existing paradigms or explore alternative scientific paradigms. * Metaphors, myths and analogies – any description of formal, mathematical, quantitative or even poetical nature still represents just an analogy. We believe that fruitful ideas can be learned from less common forms of analogies as well as from the predominant, formal and mathematical ones. * From jokes to science fiction – a story or an artistic performance may explore ideas and spark conversations that provide crucial inspiration for development of new computer science thinking. **************************************************************** ELS 2017 - 10th European Lisp Symposium Submissions: Mon 30 Jan 2017 Notifications: Mon 27 Feb 2017 http://2017.programming-conference.org/track/els-2017 **************************************************************** The purpose of the European Lisp Symposium is to provide a forum for the discussion and dissemination of all aspects of design, implementation and application of any of the Lisp and Lisp-inspired dialects, including Common Lisp, Scheme, Emacs Lisp, AutoLisp, ISLISP, Dylan, Clojure, ACL2, ECMAScript, Racket, SKILL, Hop and so on. We encourage everyone interested in Lisp to participate. The 10th European Lisp Symposium invites high quality papers about novel research results, insights and lessons learned from practical applications and educational perspectives. We also encourage submissions about known ideas as long as they are presented in a new setting and/or in a highly elegant way. Topics include but are not limited to: * Context-, aspect-, domain-oriented and generative programming * Macro-, reflective-, meta- and/or rule-based development approaches * Language design and implementation * Language integration, inter-operation and deployment * Development methodologies, support and environments * Educational approaches and perspectives * Experience reports and case studies ******************************************************************** ACM Student Research Competition / <Programming> 2017 Posters Submissions: Mon 16 Jan 2017 http://2017.programming-conference.org/track/programming-posters ******************************************************************** The ACM Student Research Competition (SRC), sponsored by Microsoft Research, offers a unique forum for ACM student members at the undergraduate and graduate levels to present their original research before a panel of judges and conference attendees. The SRC gives visibility to up-and-coming young researchers, and offers them an opportunity to discuss their research with experts in their field, get feedback, and to help sharpen communication and networking skills. ACM’s SRC program covers expenses up to $500 for all students invited to an SRC. Please see our website for requirements and further details.

1 0

[CfP] ELS'17, 10th European Lisp Symposium, April 3-4 2017, Brussels
by Didier Verna 03 Jan '17

03 Jan '17

ELS'17 - 10th European Lisp Symposium VUB - Vrije Universiteit Brussel Belgium April 3-4, 2017 In co-location with <Programming> 2017 Sponsored by Brunner Software GmbH http://www.european-lisp-symposium.org/ The purpose of the European Lisp Symposium is to provide a forum for the discussion and dissemination of all aspects of design, implementation and application of any of the Lisp and Lisp-inspired dialects, including Common Lisp, Scheme, Emacs Lisp, AutoLisp, ISLISP, Dylan, Clojure, ACL2, ECMAScript, Racket, SKILL, Hop and so on. We encourage everyone interested in Lisp to participate. The 10th European Lisp Symposium invites high quality papers about novel research results, insights and lessons learned from practical applications and educational perspectives. We also encourage submissions about known ideas as long as they are presented in a new setting and/or in a highly elegant way. Topics include but are not limited to: - Context-, aspect-, domain-oriented and generative programming - Macro-, reflective-, meta- and/or rule-based development approaches - Language design and implementation - Language integration, inter-operation and deployment - Development methodologies, support and environments - Educational approaches and perspectives - Experience reports and case studies We invite submissions in the following forms: Papers: Technical papers of up to 8 pages that describe original results or explain known ideas in new and elegant ways. Demonstrations: Abstracts of up to 2 pages for demonstrations of tools, libraries, and applications. Tutorials: Abstracts of up to 4 pages for in-depth presentations about topics of special interest for at least 90 minutes and up to 180 minutes. The symposium will also provide slots for lightning talks, to be registered on-site every day. All submissions should be formatted following the ACM SIGS guidelines and include ACM classification categories and terms. For more information on the submission guidelines and the ACM keywords, see: http://www.acm.org/sigs/publications/proceedings-templates and http://www.acm.org/about/class/1998. The conference proceedings will be published in the ACM Digital Library. Submissions should be uploaded to Easy Chair, at the following address: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=els17 Note: to help us with the review process please indicate the type of submission by entering either "paper", "demo", or "tutorial" in the Keywords field. Important dates: - 30 Jan 2017 Submission deadline - 27 Feb 2017 Notification of acceptance - 20 Mar 2017 Final papers due - 03-04 Apr 2017 Symposium Programme chair: Alberto Riva, University of Florida, USA Programme committee: Marco Antoniotti, Università Milano Bicocca, Italy Marc Battyani, FractalConcept Theo D'Hondt, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium Marc Feeley, Université de Montreal, Canada Stelian Ionescu, Google Rainer Joswig, Independent Consultant, Germany António Menezes Leitão, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal Nick Levine, RavenPack Henry Lieberman, MIT, USA Mark Tarver, Shen Programming Group Jay McCarthy, University of Massachusetts Lowell, USA Christian Queinnec, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, France François-René Rideau, Bridgewater Associates, USA Nikodemus Siivola, ZenRobotics Ltd Alessio Stalla, Università degli Studi di Genova, Italy Search Keywords: #els2017, ELS 2017, ELS '17, European Lisp Symposium 2017, European Lisp Symposium '17, 10th ELS, 10th European Lisp Symposium, European Lisp Conference 2017, European Lisp Conference '17 -- Resistance is futile. You will be jazzimilated. Didier Verna <didier(a)elsaa.org> ELSAA, President

1 0

Building and using Gambit on windows
by Bill Six 02 Jan '17

02 Jan '17

I'm unable to figure out how to use Gambit on Windows successfully, and I'd like some help. (I'm plenty comfortable with Gambit on Linux/OSX). My general feeling is that I'm using configure's "prefix" argument incorrectly on Windows, which may be causing my problem. I can build gambit just fine using the msys2 environment with mingw64 as the compiler. (Here's the head of config.log "$ ./configure --prefix=/c/opt/gambit/bld --enable-single-host --enable-gcc-opts") I can do basic stuff in gsi, such as > (+ 1 2) 3 But the following doesn't work: > (include "~~/lib/_gambit#.scm") *** ERROR IN (console)(a)2.1 -- Can't open file "\\c\\opt\\gambit\\bld\\lib/_gambit#.scm" and I can't get "gsc -exe foo.scm" (for some trivial foo.scm) to not segfault. Any ideas? Thanks, Bill

3 5

[ANN] Gambit v4.8.7 released
by gambit＠iro.umontreal.ca 28 Déc '16

28 Déc '16

1 0

Call for Papers: ICFP 2017
by Lindsey Kuper 23 Déc '16

23 Déc '16

ICFP 2017 The 22nd ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming Oxford, United Kingdom http://icfp17.sigplan.org/ Call for Papers ### Important dates Submissions due: Monday, February 27, Anywhere on Earth https://icfp17.hotcrp.com Author response: Monday, April 17, 2017, 15:00 (UTC) - Thursday, April 20, 2017, 15:00 (UTC) Notification: Monday, 1 May, 2017 Final copy due: Monday, 5 June 2017 Early registration: TBA Conference: Monday, 4 September - Wednesday, 6 September, 2017 ### New this year Those familiar with previous ICFP conferences should be aware of two significant changes that are being introduced in 2017: 1. Papers selected for ICFP 2017 will be published as the ICFP 2017 issue of a new journal, Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages (PACMPL), which replaces the previous ICFP conference proceedings. The move to PACMPL will have two noticeable impacts on authors: * A new, two-phase selection and reviewing process that conforms to ACM’s journal reviewing guidelines. * A new, single-column format for submissions. 2. Authors of papers that are conditionally accepted in the first phase of the reviewing process will have the option to submit materials for Artifact Evaluation. Further details on each of these changes are included in the following text. ### Scope ICFP 2017 seeks original papers on the art and science of functional programming. Submissions are invited on all topics from principles to practice, from foundations to features, and from abstraction to application. The scope includes all languages that encourage functional programming, including both purely applicative and imperative languages, as well as languages with objects, concurrency, or parallelism. Topics of interest include (but are not limited to): * *Language Design*: concurrency, parallelism, and distribution; modules; components and composition; metaprogramming; type systems; interoperability; domain-specific languages; and relations to imperative, object-oriented, or logic programming. * *Implementation*: abstract machines; virtual machines; interpretation; compilation; compile-time and run-time optimization; garbage collection and memory management; multi-threading; exploiting parallel hardware; interfaces to foreign functions, services, components, or low-level machine resources. * *Software-Development Techniques*: algorithms and data structures; design patterns; specification; verification; validation; proof assistants; debugging; testing; tracing; profiling. * *Foundations*: formal semantics; lambda calculus; rewriting; type theory; monads; continuations; control; state; effects; program verification; dependent types. * *Analysis and Transformation*: control-flow; data-flow; abstract interpretation; partial evaluation; program calculation. * *Applications*: symbolic computing; formal-methods tools; artificial intelligence; systems programming; distributed-systems and web programming; hardware design; databases; XML processing; scientific and numerical computing; graphical user interfaces; multimedia and 3D graphics programming; scripting; system administration; security. * *Education*: teaching introductory programming; parallel programming; mathematical proof; algebra. Submissions will be evaluated according to their relevance, correctness, significance, originality, and clarity. Each submission should explain its contributions in both general and technical terms, clearly identifying what has been accomplished, explaining why it is significant, and comparing it with previous work. The technical content should be accessible to a broad audience. ICFP 2017 also welcomes submissions in two separate categories — Functional Pearls and Experience Reports — that must be marked as such at the time of submission and that need not report original research results. Detailed guidelines on both categories are given at the end of this call. Please contact the program chair if you have questions or are concerned about the appropriateness of a topic. ### Preparation of submissions **Deadline**: The deadline for submissions is Monday, February 27, 2017, Anywhere on Earth (<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anywhere_on_Earth>). This deadline will be strictly enforced. **Formatting**: (NOTE: NEW FORMAT REQUIREMENTS FOR ICFP 2017) Submissions must be in PDF format, printable in black and white on US Letter sized paper, and interpretable by common PDF tools. All submissions must adhere to the "ACM Large" template that is available (in both LaTeX and Word formats) from <http://www.acm.org/publications/proceedings-template>. For authors using LaTeX, a lighter-weight package, including only the essential files, is available from <http://sigplan.org/Resources/Author/#acmart-format>. There is a limit of 24 pages for a full paper or 12 pages for an Experience Report; in either case, the bibliography will not be counted against these limits. These page limits have been chosen to allow essentially the same amount of content with the new single-column format as was possible with the two-column format used in past ICFP conferences. Submissions that exceed the page limits or, for other reasons, do not meet the requirements for formatting, will be summarily rejected. **Submission**: Submissions will be accepted at <https://icfp17.hotcrp.com/> (in preparation at the time of writing). Improved versions of a paper may be submitted at any point before the submission deadline using the same web interface. **Author Response Period**: Authors will have a 72-hour period, starting at 15:00 UTC on Monday, April 17, 2017, to read reviews and respond to them. **Supplementary Materials**: Authors have the option to attach supplementary material to a submission, on the understanding that reviewers may choose not to look at it. The material should be uploaded at submission time, as a single pdf or a tarball, not via a URL. This supplementary material may or may not be anonymized; if not anonymized, it will only be revealed to reviewers after they have submitted their review of the paper and learned the identity of the author(s). **Authorship Policies**: All submissions are expected to comply with the ACM Policies for Authorship that are detailed at <https://www.acm.org/publications/authors/information-for-authors>. **Republication Policies**: Each submission must adhere to SIGPLAN's republication policy, as explained on the web at <http://www.sigplan.org/Resources/Policies/Republication>. **Resubmitted Papers**: Authors who submit a revised version of a paper that has previously been rejected by another conference have the option to attach an annotated copy of the reviews of their previous submission(s), explaining how they have addressed these previous reviews in the present submission. If a reviewer identifies him/herself as a reviewer of this previous submission and wishes to see how his/her comments have been addressed, the program chair will communicate to this reviewer the annotated copy of his/her previous review. Otherwise, no reviewer will read the annotated copies of the previous reviews. ### Review Process This section outlines the two-stage process with lightweight double-blind reviewing that will be used to select papers for presentation at ICFP 2017. We anticipate that there will be a need to clarify and expand on this process, and we will maintain a list of frequently asked questions and answers on the conference website to address common concerns. **ICFP 2017 will employ a two-stage review process.** The first stage in the review process will assess submitted papers using the criteria stated above and will allow for feedback and input on initial reviews through the author response period mentioned previously. At the PC meeting, a set of papers will be conditionally accepted and all other papers will be rejected. Authors will be notified of these decisions on May 1, 2017. Authors of conditionally accepted papers will be provided with committee reviews (just as in previous conferences) along with a set of mandatory revisions. After five weeks (June 5, 2017), the authors will provide a second submission. The second and final reviewing phase assesses whether the mandatory revisions have been adequately addressed by the authors and thereby determines the final accept/reject status of the paper. The intent and expectation is that the mandatory revisions can be addressed within five weeks and hence that conditionally accepted papers will in general be accepted in the second phase. The second submission should clearly identify how the mandatory revisions were addressed. To that end, the second submission must be accompanied by a cover letter mapping each mandatory revision request to specific parts of the paper. The cover letter will facilitate a quick second review, allowing for confirmation of final acceptance within two weeks. Conversely, the absence of a cover letter will be grounds for the paper’s rejection. This process is intended as a refinement of the review process that has been used in previous ICFP conferences. By incorporating a second stage, the process will conform to ACM’s journal reviewing guidelines for PACMPL. **ICFP 2017 will employ a lightweight double-blind reviewing process.** To facilitate this, submitted papers must adhere to two rules: 1. **author names and institutions must be omitted**, and 2. **references to authors' own related work should be in the third person** (e.g., not "We build on our previous work ..." but rather "We build on the work of ..."). The purpose of this process is to help the PC and external reviewers come to an initial judgement about the paper without bias, not to make it impossible for them to discover the authors if they were to try. Nothing should be done in the name of anonymity that weakens the submission or makes the job of reviewing the paper more difficult (e.g., important background references should not be omitted or anonymized). In addition, authors should feel free to disseminate their ideas or draft versions of their paper as they normally would. For instance, authors may post drafts of their papers on the web or give talks on their research ideas. ### Information for Authors of Accepted Papers * As a condition of acceptance, final versions of all papers must adhere to the new ACM Large format. The page limits for final versions of papers will be increased to ensure that authors have space to respond to reviewer comments and mandatory revisions. * Authors of accepted submissions will be required to agree to one of the three ACM licensing options: copyright transfer to ACM; retaining copyright but granting ACM exclusive publication rights; or open access on payment of a fee. Further information about ACM author rights is available from <http://authors.acm.org>. * At least one author of each accepted submissions will be expected to attend and present their paper at the conference. The schedule for presentations will be determined and shared with authors after the full program has been selected. Presentations will be videotaped and released online if the presenter consents. * We intend that the proceedings will be freely available for download from the ACM Digital Library in perpetuity via the OpenTOC mechanism. * ACM Author-Izer is a unique service that enables ACM authors to generate and post links on either their home page or institutional repository for visitors to download the definitive version of their articles from the ACM Digital Library at no charge. Downloads through Author-Izer links are captured in official ACM statistics, improving the accuracy of usage and impact measurements. Consistently linking to the definitive version of an ACM article should reduce user confusion over article versioning. After an article has been published and assigned to the appropriate ACM Author Profile pages, authors should visit <http://www.acm.org/publications/acm-author-izer-service> to learn how to create links for free downloads from the ACM DL. * The official publication date is the date the proceedings are made available in the ACM Digital Library. This date may be up to *two weeks prior* to the first day of the conference. The official publication date affects the deadline for any patent filings related to published work. ### Artifact Evaluation Authors of papers that are conditionally accepted in the first phase of the review process will be encouraged (but not required) to submit supporting materials for Artifact Evaluation. These items will then be reviewed by a committee, separate from the program committee, whose task is to assess how the artifacts support the work described in the associated paper. Papers that go through the Artifact Evaluation process successfully will receive a seal of approval printed on the papers themselves. Authors of accepted papers will be encouraged to make the supporting materials publicly available upon publication of the proceedings, for example, by including them as "source materials" in the ACM Digital Library. An additional seal will mark papers whose artifacts are made available, as outlined in the ACM guidelines for artifact badging. Participation in Artifact Evaluation is voluntary and will not influence the final decision regarding paper acceptance. Further information about the motivations and expectations for Artifact Evaluation can be found at <http://icfp17.sigplan.org/track/icfp-2017-Artifacts>. ### Special categories of papers In addition to research papers, ICFP solicits two kinds of papers that do not require original research contributions: Functional Pearls, which are full papers, and Experience Reports, which are limited to half the length of a full paper. Authors submitting such papers should consider the following guidelines. #### Functional Pearls A Functional Pearl is an elegant essay about something related to functional programming. Examples include, but are not limited to: * a new and thought-provoking way of looking at an old idea * an instructive example of program calculation or proof * a nifty presentation of an old or new data structure * an interesting application of functional programming techniques * a novel use or exposition of functional programming in the classroom While pearls often demonstrate an idea through the development of a short program, there is no requirement or expectation that they do so. Thus, they encompass the notions of theoretical and educational pearls. Functional Pearls are valued as highly and judged as rigorously as ordinary papers, but using somewhat different criteria. In particular, a pearl is not required to report original research, but, it should be concise, instructive, and entertaining. A pearl is likely to be rejected if its readers get bored, if the material gets too complicated, if too much specialized knowledge is needed, or if the writing is inelegant. The key to writing a good pearl is polishing. A submission that is intended to be treated as a pearl must be marked as such on the submission web page, and should contain the words "Functional Pearl" somewhere in its title or subtitle. These steps will alert reviewers to use the appropriate evaluation criteria. Pearls will be combined with ordinary papers, however, for the purpose of computing the conference's acceptance rate. #### Experience Reports The purpose of an Experience Report is to help create a body of published, refereed, citable evidence that functional programming really works — or to describe what obstacles prevent it from working. Possible topics for an Experience Report include, but are not limited to: * insights gained from real-world projects using functional programming * comparison of functional programming with conventional programming in the context of an industrial project or a university curriculum * project-management, business, or legal issues encountered when using functional programming in a real-world project * curricular issues encountered when using functional programming in education * real-world constraints that created special challenges for an implementation of a functional language or for functional programming in general An Experience Report is distinguished from a normal ICFP paper by its title, by its length, and by the criteria used to evaluate it. * Both in the proceedings and in any citations, the title of each accepted Experience Report must begin with the words "Experience Report" followed by a colon. The acceptance rate for Experience Reports will be computed and reported separately from the rate for ordinary papers. * Experience Report submissions can be at most 12 pages long, excluding bibliography. * Each accepted Experience Report will be presented at the conference, but depending on the number of Experience Reports and regular papers accepted, authors of Experience reports may be asked to give shorter talks. * Because the purpose of Experience Reports is to enable our community to accumulate a body of evidence about the efficacy of functional programming, an acceptable Experience Report need not add to the body of knowledge of the functional-programming community by presenting novel results or conclusions. It is sufficient if the Report states a clear thesis and provides supporting evidence. The thesis must be relevant to ICFP, but it need not be novel. The program committee will accept or reject Experience Reports based on whether they judge the evidence to be convincing. Anecdotal evidence will be acceptable provided it is well argued and the author explains what efforts were made to gather as much evidence as possible. Typically, more convincing evidence is obtained from papers which show how functional programming was used than from papers which only say that functional programming was used. The most convincing evidence often includes comparisons of situations before and after the introduction or discontinuation of functional programming. Evidence drawn from a single person's experience may be sufficient, but more weight will be given to evidence drawn from the experience of groups of people. An Experience Report should be short and to the point: it should make a claim about how well functional programming worked on a particular project and why, and produce evidence to substantiate this claim. If functional programming worked in this case in the same ways it has worked for others, the paper need only summarize the results — the main part of the paper should discuss how well it worked and in what context. Most readers will not want to know all the details of the project and its implementation, but the paper should characterize the project and its context well enough so that readers can judge to what degree this experience is relevant to their own projects. The paper should take care to highlight any unusual aspects of the project. Specifics about the project are more valuable than generalities about functional programming; for example, it is more valuable to say that the team delivered its software a month ahead of schedule than it is to say that functional programming made the team more productive. If the paper not only describes experience but also presents new technical results, or if the experience refutes cherished beliefs of the functional-programming community, it may be better off submitted it as a full paper, which will be judged by the usual criteria of novelty, originality, and relevance. The program chair will be happy to advise on any concerns about which category to submit to. ### Organizers General Chair: Jeremy Gibbons (University of Oxford, UK) Program Chair: Mark Jones (Portland State University, USA) Artifact Evaluation Chair: Ryan R. Newton (Indiana University, USA) Industrial Relations Chair: Ryan Trinkle (Obsidian Systems LLC, USA) Programming Contest Organiser: Sam Lindley (University of Edinburgh, UK) Publicity and Web Chair: Lindsey Kuper (Intel Labs, USA) Student Research Competition Chair: Ilya Sergey (University College London, UK) Video Chair: Jose Calderon (Galois, Inc., USA) Workshops Co-Chair: Andres Löh (Well-Typed LLP) Workshops Co-Chair: David Christiansen (Indiana University, USA) Program Committee: Bob Atkey (University of Strathclyde, Scotland) Adam Chlipala (MIT, USA) Dominique Devriese (KU Leuven, Belgium) Martin Erwig (Oregon State, USA) Matthew Flatt (University of Utah, USA) Ronald Garcia (University of British Columbia, Canada) Kathryn Gray (University of Cambridge, England) John Hughes (Chalmers University and Quvik, Sweden) Chung-Kil Hur (Seoul National University, Korea) Graham Hutton (University of Nottingham, England) Alan Jeffrey (Mozilla Research, USA) Ranjit Jhala (University of California, San Diego, USA) Shin-ya Katsumata (Kyoto University, Japan) Lindsey Kuper (Intel Labs, USA) Dan Licata (Wesleyan University, USA) Ben Lippmeier (Digital Asset, Australia) Gabriel Scherer (Northeastern University, USA) Alexandra Silva (University College London, England) Nikhil Swamy (Microsoft Research, USA) Sam Tobin-Hochstadt (Indiana University, USA) Nicolas Wu (University of Bristol, England) Beta Ziliani (CONICET and FAMAF, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina)

1 0

Linkage order will affect behavior of same code?
by Meng Zhang 09 Déc '16

09 Déc '16

I have three scm files: main.scm: (display "Hello from main.scm.") (newline) (f1a-func) (f2-func) f1a.scm: (define (f1a-func) (display "f1a-func was called") (f2-func) (newline)) f2.scm: (define (f2-func) (display "Hello from f2.scm") (newline)) With gcc f1a.o f2.o main.o main_.o -lgambit, it compiles and generate expected output. With gcc main.o f1a.o f2.o main_.o -lgambit, it compiles but will raise an exception on missing f1a-func / f2-func. Is this expected behavior? Any workaround exist? My testing environment is OSX El Captain Thanks Meng -- Meng

2 1

Emscripten compiled gambit-c app can not be executed in web browser environment
by 周宇 02 Déc '16

02 Déc '16

Hi Marc, I was frustrated trying to run emscripten powered gambit-c program on web browser. The attachment gsi.scm is my program, there's an explicitly main function delcare here to make sure the js code was completely loaded before calling gambit-c _setup() function. I put ##repl-debug-main in primordial thread and call _setup() in main to bring up the whole gambit-c system. I use the attachment my-build-script to generate the ultimate gsi.js file. I issue echo "(load \"fib\") (pp (time (fib 20)))" | /usr/bin/time node gsi.js, and everything is fine. Unfortunately gsi.js was stuck in a web browser environment. Through some experiment, I found the _setup() function never return, the comment in the code said it will create a service thread which executes the rest of the program. I think it is the reason why it hung the web browser. I also did another experiment, explicitly make the primordial thread exit. said issue echo "(load \"fib\") (pp (time (fib 20))) ,q" | /usr/bin/time node gsi.js, but the web_trampoline function throw an exception, I trace the exception was threw from macro-run-queue of ##next-heartbeat-interval function The reason I don't want to use recent gambit to build with emscripten is I am afraid the ultimate js file would be tremendious large. Looking forward your reply and help

1 0

Issues building Gambit with --enable-cplusplus
by Bob Coleman 28 Nov '16

28 Nov '16

Hello, I'm trying to create a simple Gambit wrapper for the opencv library. Opencv is written in C++ so I tried to build Gambit with the --enable-cplusplus flag. I was hoping this would be easier than trying to build a Gambit wrapper around a C wrapper around opencv, but I haven't been able to Gambit to build with the C++ option. I have no problems building Gambit with gcc, but g++ gives the errors below. Is there more to a C++ build that I may be missing? Is there an easier way to wrap a C++ library? I included my compiler versions below as well. Thanks for you help,Bob # configuring with just the --enable-cplusplus flag gives the errors below:# ./configure --enable-cplusplus bob@bob-Gazelle:~/GambitSchemeSourceRepo/gambit$ make -j8 from-scratch...libgambitgsc.a(_source.o): In function `___H_c_23__2a__2a_readtable_2d_string_2d_convert_2d_case_21_':_source.c:(.text+0xde0b): undefined reference to `___towupper'_source.c:(.text+0xdeca): undefined reference to `___towlower'libgambitgsc.a(_source.o): In function `___H_c_23__2a__2a_readtable_2d_convert_2d_case':_source.c:(.text+0xdfc9): undefined reference to `___towupper'_source.c:(.text+0xdfdd): undefined reference to `___towlower'libgambitgsc.a(_front.o): In function `___H_c_23_valid_2d_module_2d_name_3f_':_front.c:(.text+0x268c1): undefined reference to `___iswspace'libgambitgsc.a(_asm.o): In function `___H___asm_23_asm_2d_float_2d__3e_exact_2d_exponential_2d_format':_asm.c:(.text+0x24b24): undefined reference to `___isfinite'_asm.c:(.text+0x24b37): undefined reference to `___trunc'collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit statusmake[2]: *** [gsc] Error 1make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1make: *** [from-scratch] Error 2 # configuring with my typical options plus --enable-cplusplus gives a different# set of errors#./configure --enable-single-host --enable-cplusplus --enable-c-opt --enable-gcc-opts --enable-openssl bob@bob-Gazelle:~/GambitSchemeSourceRepo/gambit$ make -j8 from-scratch...os_io.c: In function ‘long int ___release_rc_tls_context(void*)’:os_io.c:3705:23: error: invalid conversion from ‘void*’ to ‘___tls_context* {aka ___tls_context_t*}’ [-fpermissive] ___tls_context *c = x; ^os_io.c: In function ‘long int ___os_make_tls_context(long int, long int, long int, long int, long int, long int, long int)’:os_io.c:3911:20: error: invalid conversion from ‘void*’ to ‘void**’ [-fpermissive] 0) ^In file included from os_io.c:12:0:../include/gambit.h:10260:23: note: initializing argument 2 of ‘long int ___SCMOBJ_to_STRING(long int, void**, int, int, int)’ ___IMP_FUNC(___SCMOBJ,___SCMOBJ_to_STRING) ^../include/gambit.h:1554:43: note: in definition of macro ‘___IMP_FUNC’ #define ___IMP_FUNC(type,name)extern type name ^os_io.c:3919:20: error: invalid conversion from ‘void*’ to ‘void**’ [-fpermissive] 0) ^In file included from os_io.c:12:0:../include/gambit.h:10260:23: note: initializing argument 2 of ‘long int ___SCMOBJ_to_STRING(long int, void**, int, int, int)’ ___IMP_FUNC(___SCMOBJ,___SCMOBJ_to_STRING) ^../include/gambit.h:1554:43: note: in definition of macro ‘___IMP_FUNC’ #define ___IMP_FUNC(type,name)extern type name ^os_io.c:3927:20: error: invalid conversion from ‘void*’ to ‘void**’ [-fpermissive] 0) ^In file included from os_io.c:12:0:../include/gambit.h:10260:23: note: initializing argument 2 of ‘long int ___SCMOBJ_to_STRING(long int, void**, int, int, int)’ ___IMP_FUNC(___SCMOBJ,___SCMOBJ_to_STRING) ^../include/gambit.h:1554:43: note: in definition of macro ‘___IMP_FUNC’ #define ___IMP_FUNC(type,name)extern type name ^In file included from os_io.c:12:0:../include/gambit.h:10260:23: note: initializing argument 2 of ‘long int ___SCMOBJ_to_STRING(long int, void**, int, int, int)’ ___IMP_FUNC(___SCMOBJ,___SCMOBJ_to_STRING) ^../include/gambit.h:1554:43: note: in definition of macro ‘___IMP_FUNC’ #define ___IMP_FUNC(type,name)extern type name ^os_io.c:3941:20: error: invalid conversion from ‘void*’ to ‘void**’ [-fpermissive] 0) ^In file included from os_io.c:12:0:../include/gambit.h:10260:23: note: initializing argument 2 of ‘long int ___SCMOBJ_to_STRING(long int, void**, int, int, int)’ ___IMP_FUNC(___SCMOBJ,___SCMOBJ_to_STRING) ^../include/gambit.h:1554:43: note: in definition of macro ‘___IMP_FUNC’ #define ___IMP_FUNC(type,name)extern type name ^make[2]: *** [os_io.o] Error 1make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1make: *** [from-scratch] Error 2 ## compiler versions, in case that's helpful # gcc -vUsing built-in specs.COLLECT_GCC=gccCOLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/5/lto-wrapperTarget: x86_64-linux-gnuConfigured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Ubuntu 5.4.0-6ubuntu1~16.04.4' --with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-5/README.Bugs --enable-languages=c,ada,c++,java,go,d,fortran,objc,obj-c++ --prefix=/usr --program-suffix=-5 --enable-shared --enable-linker-build-id --libexecdir=/usr/lib --without-included-gettext --enable-threads=posix --libdir=/usr/lib --enable-nls --with-sysroot=/ --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-libstdcxx-debug --enable-libstdcxx-time=yes --with-default-libstdcxx-abi=new --enable-gnu-unique-object --disable-vtable-verify --enable-libmpx --enable-plugin --with-system-zlib --disable-browser-plugin --enable-java-awt=gtk --enable-gtk-cairo --with-java-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.5.0-gcj-5-amd64/jre --enable-java-home --with-jvm-root-dir=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.5.0-gcj-5-amd64 --with-jvm-jar-dir=/usr/lib/jvm-exports/java-1.5.0-gcj-5-amd64 --with-arch-directory=amd64 --with-ecj-jar=/usr/share/java/eclipse-ecj.jar --enable-objc-gc --enable-multiarch --disable-werror --with-arch-32=i686 --with-abi=m64 --with-multilib-list=m32,m64,mx32 --enable-multilib --with-tune=generic --enable-checking=release --build=x86_64-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-linux-gnuThread model: posixgcc version 5.4.0 20160609 (Ubuntu 5.4.0-6ubuntu1~16.04.4) # g++ -vUsing built-in specs.COLLECT_GCC=g++COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/5/lto-wrapperTarget: x86_64-linux-gnuConfigured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Ubuntu 5.4.0-6ubuntu1~16.04.4' --with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-5/README.Bugs --enable-languages=c,ada,c++,java,go,d,fortran,objc,obj-c++ --prefix=/usr --program-suffix=-5 --enable-shared --enable-linker-build-id --libexecdir=/usr/lib --without-included-gettext --enable-threads=posix --libdir=/usr/lib --enable-nls --with-sysroot=/ --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-libstdcxx-debug --enable-libstdcxx-time=yes --with-default-libstdcxx-abi=new --enable-gnu-unique-object --disable-vtable-verify --enable-libmpx --enable-plugin --with-system-zlib --disable-browser-plugin --enable-java-awt=gtk --enable-gtk-cairo --with-java-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.5.0-gcj-5-amd64/jre --enable-java-home --with-jvm-root-dir=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.5.0-gcj-5-amd64 --with-jvm-jar-dir=/usr/lib/jvm-exports/java-1.5.0-gcj-5-amd64 --with-arch-directory=amd64 --with-ecj-jar=/usr/share/java/eclipse-ecj.jar --enable-objc-gc --enable-multiarch --disable-werror --with-arch-32=i686 --with-abi=m64 --with-multilib-list=m32,m64,mx32 --enable-multilib --with-tune=generic --enable-checking=release --build=x86_64-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-linux-gnuThread model: posixgcc version 5.4.0 20160609 (Ubuntu 5.4.0-6ubuntu1~16.04.4)

2 2

Thanks for Gambit, Marc!
by Adam 27 Nov '16

27 Nov '16

Thanks for Gambit, Marc! And happy thanksgiving (45 days belated)! Adam

2 1

[ANN] Gambit v4.8.6 released
by gambit＠iro.umontreal.ca 19 Nov '16

19 Nov '16

4 5