
An Introduction to Redex with Abstracting Abstract Machines - jcr
http://dvanhorn.github.io/redex-aam-tutorial/#
======
jcr
This was posted once before by HN user 'ingve' but didn't get much attention
[1]. Though the most recent and largest (39 pages) JFP paper, " _Systematic
Abstraction of Abstract Machines_ ", is probably the best version to read, the
earlier " _Abstracting Abstract Machines_ " may also be helpful. There's also
a CACM highlight version of " _Abstracting Abstract Machines_ " that's only 8
pages. All of these papers are available.

\- " _Systematic Abstraction of Abstract Machines_ " from JFP 2012 (39 pages)

[http://arxiv.org/abs/1107.3539](http://arxiv.org/abs/1107.3539)

\- " _Abstracting Abstract Machines_ " from ACM ICFP, 2010, (12 pages)

[http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.4446](http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.4446)

[http://www.cs.umd.edu/class/fall2014/cmsc631/papers/vanhorn-...](http://www.cs.umd.edu/class/fall2014/cmsc631/papers/vanhorn-
aam.pdf)

\- " _Abstracting Abstract Machines_ " from CACM highlight 2011 (8 pages)

[http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/dvanhorn/pubs/vanhorn-might-
cacm...](http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/dvanhorn/pubs/vanhorn-might-cacm11.pdf)

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10963677](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10963677)

~~~
logicrook
Oh thanks, that looks pretty interesting, and will distract from shitposting
on random pop-science/political quasi-journalism articles for a while. It
seems that it was the purpose of HN, but I'm not sure anymore.

However, it is unfortunately hard to make relevant comments on such articles.
As the introduction says, it's pretty quick to set everything up (just one
apt-get away), the clean racket syntax allows to define a calculus very
neatly, but that's a far cry from being able to say much about it. I think
I'll try to follow the tutorial with a classical calculus (λμ) and see how
that turns out, but that's going to take some time. So here goes "This was
posted once before by HN user 'ingve' but didn't get much attention".

~~~
jcr
The types and quality of stories on HN are like the tides; it regularly
varies. One of the goals for HN is to have a good, balanced mix of interesting
stories. Due to voting, populist stuff will surface, but HN still has an
appreciation for heavy-weight, time-intensive articles.

Some truly great stories get few, if any, comments. If a post requires effort
or specialized knowledge to even ask good questions, then there isn't much
discussion. This happens a lot when academic papers are posted since reading a
paper might require a multi-hour investment, but even when there is little
discussion, it's good to have heavy articles submitted. They balance out the
other stuff.

If you find something great-but-overlooked in the /newest queue, then send an
email to hn@ycombinator.com asking for a repost request to be sent to the
original submitter. That's what I did with this article, but Dan (dang) asked
me to repost it myself. Neither 'ingve' nor I care who gets the credit/karma,
but a lot of people want great articles to get attention on HN.

HN is what we make it.

~~~
logicrook
>HN is what we make it.

Exactly, and certainly there are other people who would like to see more of
that in first page, but you just can't bash useful comments, so even with good
intentions you can be part of the problem (talking for myself).

Thank you for this comment, and again for resubmitting this.

~~~
dang
The best thing to do about this is to find such articles and submit them. As
jcr pointed out, HN has both moderation and software to try to give these than
one chance at the front page. (See
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10705926](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10705926)
and the other links there.) That's what happened in the present case, for
example. But for this to work, users need to find the stories and post them.

