hckrnws

Most of the references in this article are from decades ago. It feels like denotational semantics has not become the success is claimed to be. I studied the book: 'The Denotational Description of Programming Languages: An Introduction' by Michael J. C. Gordon from 1979 while studying computer science in the eighties.

One of the references in the article, is a reference to the book: 'Denotational Semantics: A Methodology for Language Development' https://www.scss.tcd.ie/Andrew.Butterfield/Teaching/CS4003/D...

I took a Denotational Semantics course in college in the 80's. I was completely lost, despite going to class every day and trying to understand what they were teaching.

I got a 37% on the mid-term and thought "holy f, this is a class I am not going to pass, wtf is going on?"

I went to the prof during office hours, explained I'm confused, he asked to see my mid-term and exclaimed "Hey, you got the highest score!"

To this day I can still see the gray skinny little textbook with the title "Denotational Semantics" and I still wonder "what the heck was that course about?"

Same here. Still got the book on my bookshelf. Still don't get it. Never needed it.

The article itself is more than a decade old: "Submitted on 20 Sep 2013".

https://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/~eptcs/content.cgi?DSS2013

Other essays from the same occasion.

Needs a "(2013)" in the HN title.