Approximate Normalization for Gradual Dependent Types

Dependent types help programmers write highly reliable code. However, this reliability comes at a cost: it can be challenging to write new prototypes in (or migrate old code to) dependently-typed programming languages. Gradual typing makes static type disciplines more flexible, so an appropriate notion of gradual dependent types could fruitfully lower this cost. However, dependent types raise unique challenges for gradual typing. Dependent typechecking involves the execution of program code, but gradually-typed code can signal runtime type errors or diverge. These runtime errors threaten the soundness guarantees that make dependent types so attractive, while divergence spoils the type-driven programming experience. This paper presents GDTL, a gradual dependently-typed language that emphasizes pragmatic dependently-typed programming. GDTL fully embeds both an untyped and dependently-typed language, and allows for smooth transitions between the two. In addition to gradual types we introduce gradual terms , which allow the user to be imprecise in type indices and to omit proof terms; runtime checks ensure type safety . To account for nontermination and failure, we distinguish between compile-time normalization and run-time execution: compile-time normalization is approximate but total, while runtime execution is exact , but may fail or diverge. We prove that GDTL has decidable typechecking and satisfies all the expected properties of gradual languages. In particular, GDTL satisfies the static and dynamic gradual guarantees: reducing type precision preserves typedness, and altering type precision does not change program behavior outside of dynamic type failures. To prove these properties, we were led to establish a novel normalization gradual guarantee that captures the monotonicity of approximate normalization with respect to imprecision

A Reasonably Gradual Type Theory

Gradualizing the Calculus of Inductive Constructions (CIC) involves dealing with subtle tensions between normalization, graduality, and conservativity with respect to CIC. Recently, GCIC has been proposed as a parametrized gradual type theory that admits three variants, each sacrificing one of these properties. For devising a gradual proof assistant based on CIC, normalization and conservativity with respect to CIC are key, but the tension with graduality needs to be addressed. Additionally, several challenges remain: (1) The presence of two wildcard terms at any type-the error and unknown terms-enables trivial proofs of any theorem, jeopardizing the use of a gradual type theory in a proof assistant; (2) Supporting general indexed inductive families, most prominently equality, is an open problem; (3) Theoretical accounts of gradual typing and graduality so far do not support handling type mismatches detected during reduction; (4) Precision and graduality are external notions not amenable to reasoning within a gradual type theory. All these issues manifest primally in CastCIC, the cast calculus used to define GCIC. In this work, we present an extension of CastCIC called GRIP. GRIP is a reasonably gradual type theory that addresses the issues above, featuring internal precision and general exception handling. GRIP features an impure (gradual) sort of types inhabited by errors and unknown terms, and a pure (non-gradual) sort of strict propositions for consistent reasoning about gradual terms. Internal precision supports reasoning about graduality within GRIP itself, for instance to characterize gradual exception-handling terms, and supports gradual subset types. We develop the metatheory of GRIP using a model formalized in Coq, and provide a prototype implementation of GRIP in Agda.Comment: 27pages + 2pages bibliograph

Call-by-name Gradual Type Theory

We present gradual type theory, a logic and type theory for call-by-name gradual typing. We define the central constructions of gradual typing (the dynamic type, type casts and type error) in a novel way, by universal properties relative to new judgments for gradual type and term dynamism, which were developed in blame calculi and to state the "gradual guarantee" theorem of gradual typing. Combined with the ordinary extensionality ($\eta$) principles that type theory provides, we show that most of the standard operational behavior of casts is uniquely determined by the gradual guarantee. This provides a semantic justification for the definitions of casts, and shows that non-standard definitions of casts must violate these principles. Our type theory is the internal language of a certain class of preorder categories called equipments. We give a general construction of an equipment interpreting gradual type theory from a 2-category representing non-gradual types and programs, which is a semantic analogue of Findler and Felleisen's definitions of contracts, and use it to build some concrete domain-theoretic models of gradual typing

Securing Verified IO Programs Against Unverified Code in F*

We introduce SCIO*, a formally secure compilation framework for statically verified partial programs performing input-output (IO). The source language is an F* subset in which a verified program interacts with its IO-performing context via a higher-order interface that includes refinement types as well as pre- and post-conditions about past IO events. The target language is a smaller F* subset in which the compiled program is linked with an adversarial context that has an interface without refinement types, pre-conditions, or concrete post-conditions. To bridge this interface gap and make compilation and linking secure we propose a formally verified combination of higher-order contracts and reference monitoring for recording and controlling IO operations. Compilation uses contracts to convert the logical assumptions the program makes about the context into dynamic checks on each context-program boundary crossing. These boundary checks can depend on information about past IO events stored in the state of the monitor. But these checks cannot stop the adversarial target context before it performs dangerous IO operations. Therefore linking in SCIO* additionally forces the context to perform all IO actions via a secure IO library, which uses reference monitoring to dynamically enforce an access control policy before each IO operation. We prove in F* that SCIO* soundly enforces a global trace property for the compiled verified program linked with the untrusted context. Moreover, we prove in F* that SCIO* satisfies by construction Robust Relational Hyperproperty Preservation, a very strong secure compilation criterion. Finally, we illustrate SCIO* at work on a simple web server example.Comment: POPL'24 camera-ready versio

The Dynamic Practice and Static Theory of Gradual Typing

We can tease apart the research on gradual types into two `lineages\u27: a pragmatic, implementation-oriented dynamic-first lineage and a formal, type-theoretic, static-first lineage. The dynamic-first lineage\u27s focus is on taming particular idioms - `pre-existing conditions\u27 in untyped programming languages. The static-first lineage\u27s focus is on interoperation and individual type system features, rather than the collection of features found in any particular language. Both appear in programming languages research under the name "gradual typing", and they are in active conversation with each other. What are these two lineages? What challenges and opportunities await the static-first lineage? What progress has been made so far

On the Multi-Language Construction

Modern software is no more developed in a single programming language. Instead, programmers tend to exploit cross-language interoperability mechanisms to combine code stemming from different languages, and thus yielding fully-fledged multi-language programs. Whilst this approach enables developers to benefit from the strengths of each single-language, on the other hand it complicates the semantics of such programs. Indeed, the resulting multi-language does not meet any of the semantics of the combined languages. In this paper, we broaden the boundary functions-based approach a la Matthews and Findler to propose an algebraic framework that provides a constructive mathematical notion of multi-language able to determine its semantics. The aim of this work is to overcome the lack of a formal method (resp., model) to design (resp., represent) a multi-language, regardless of the inherent nature of the underlying languages. We show that our construction ensures the uniqueness of the semantic function (i.e., the multi-language semantics induced by the combined languages) by proving the initiality of the term model (i.e., the abstract syntax of the multi-language) in its category

Transport via Partial Galois Connections and Equivalences

Multiple types can represent the same concept. For example, lists and trees can both represent sets. Unfortunately, this easily leads to incomplete libraries: some set-operations may only be available on lists, others only on trees. Similarly, subtypes and quotients are commonly used to construct new type abstractions in formal verification. In such cases, one often wishes to reuse operations on the representation type for the new type abstraction, but to no avail: the types are not the same. To address these problems, we present a new framework that transports programs via equivalences. Existing transport frameworks are either designed for dependently typed, constructive proof assistants, use univalence, or are restricted to partial quotient types. Our framework (1) is designed for simple type theory, (2) generalises previous approaches working on partial quotient types, and (3) is based on standard mathematical concepts, particularly Galois connections and equivalences. We introduce the notion of partial Galois connections and equivalences and prove their closure properties under (dependent) function relators, (co)datatypes, and compositions. We formalised the framework in Isabelle/HOL and provide a prototype. This is the extended version of "Transport via Partial Galois Connections and Equivalences", 21st Asian Symposium on Programming Languages and Systems, 2023.Comment: 18 pages; will appear at 21st Asian Symposium on Programming Languages and Systems, 202