Skip to content

Research

POPL 2015 Artifact Evaluation Revisted

Just over a decade again POPL ran its first artifact evaluation and I was on it! I'm listed in the proceedings as "Emma F. Tosch" as an inside joke with Arjun, who ran the committee. I have what only I think is a Very Interesting Tale of reviewing, but that's not what this post is about. Instead, this post is about tracking down those old artifacts with just a pinch of oral history.

Answering the important questions

Here in the MaPLE lab, we treat the techniques students cultivate in their programming systems classes as general methods for answering a broad range of research questions that arise in and around software when it is used in nontraditional ways. As a result, students without formal training in the techniques we use often ask: "What is PL?," whereas those with training often ask: "How is what you do PL?"

You must not know about me

Research philosophy

Everyone should have an elevator pitch about their research. When we start out, that pitch is very focused on a particular project, problem, or technique. As time passes, we form a more expansive research vision that can encompass new domains, related problems, and complementary techniques, but still ties everything together in a coherent philosophy, with a long-term goal. My pitch is: programming languages (PL) and software engineering (SE) form the methodological foundation for next-generation advancements in data-driven scientific inquiry. Just as scientific instruments made new experiments and discoveries possible, so too will new programming languages, systems, frameworks, and platforms.