Row and Bounded Polymorphism via Disjoint Polymorphism

Polymorphism and subtyping are important features in mainstream OO languages. The most common way to integrate the two is via ?_{< :} style bounded quantification. A closely related mechanism is row polymorphism, which provides an alternative to subtyping, while still enabling many of the same applications. Yet another approach is to have type systems with intersection types and polymorphism. A recent addition to this design space are calculi with disjoint intersection types and disjoint polymorphism. With all these alternatives it is natural to wonder how they are related. This paper provides an answer to this question. We show that disjoint polymorphism can recover forms of both row polymorphism and bounded polymorphism, while retaining key desirable properties, such as type-safety and decidability. Furthermore, we identify the extra power of disjoint polymorphism which enables additional features that cannot be easily encoded in calculi with row polymorphism or bounded quantification alone. Ultimately we expect that our work is useful to inform language designers about the expressive power of those common features, and to simplify implementations and metatheory of feature-rich languages with polymorphism and subtyping

Using Inhabitation in Bounded Combinatory Logic with Intersection Types for Composition Synthesis

We describe ongoing work on a framework for automatic composition synthesis from a repository of software components. This work is based on combinatory logic with intersection types. The idea is that components are modeled as typed combinators, and an algorithm for inhabitation {\textemdash} is there a combinatory term e with type tau relative to an environment Gamma? {\textemdash} can be used to synthesize compositions. Here, Gamma represents the repository in the form of typed combinators, tau specifies the synthesis goal, and e is the synthesized program. We illustrate our approach by examples, including an application to synthesis from GUI-components.Comment: In Proceedings ITRS 2012, arXiv:1307.784

Programming Languages and Systems

This open access book constitutes the proceedings of the 28th European Symposium on Programming, ESOP 2019, which took place in Prague, Czech Republic, in April 2019, held as Part of the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software, ETAPS 2019

A Semantics for Approximate Program Transformations

An approximate program transformation is a transformation that can change the semantics of a program within a specified empirical error bound. Such transformations have wide applications: they can decrease computation time, power consumption, and memory usage, and can, in some cases, allow implementations of incomputable operations. Correctness proofs of approximate program transformations are by definition quantitative. Unfortunately, unlike with standard program transformations, there is as of yet no modular way to prove correctness of an approximate transformation itself. Error bounds must be proved for each transformed program individually, and must be re-proved each time a program is modified or a different set of approximations are applied. In this paper, we give a semantics that enables quantitative reasoning about a large class of approximate program transformations in a local, composable way. Our semantics is based on a notion of distance between programs that defines what it means for an approximate transformation to be correct up to an error bound. The key insight is that distances between programs cannot in general be formulated in terms of metric spaces and real numbers. Instead, our semantics admits natural notions of distance for each type construct; for example, numbers are used as distances for numerical data, functions are used as distances for functional data, an polymorphic lambda-terms are used as distances for polymorphic data. We then show how our semantics applies to two example approximations: replacing reals with floating-point numbers, and loop perforation