Functional Big-step Semantics

When doing an interactive proof about a piece of software, it is important that the underlying programming language’s semantics does not make the proof unnecessarily difficult or unwieldy. Both smallstep and big-step semantics are commonly used, and the latter is typically given by an inductively defined relation. In this paper, we consider an alternative: using a recursive function akin to an interpreter for the language. The advantages include a better induction theorem, less duplication, accessibility to ordinary functional programmers, and the ease of doing symbolic simulation in proofs via rewriting. We believe that this style of semantics is well suited for compiler verification, including proofs of divergence preservation. We do not claim the invention of this style of semantics: our contribution here is to clarify its value, and to explain how it supports several language features that might appear to require a relational or small-step approach. We illustrate the technique on a simple imperative language with C-like for-loops and a break statement, and compare it to a variety of other approaches. We also provide ML and lambda-calculus based examples to illustrate its generality

Towards Compatible and Interderivable Semantic Specifications for the Scheme Programming Language, Part I: Denotational Semantics, Natural Semantics, and Abstract Machines

We derive two big-step abstract machines, a natural semantics, and the valuation function of a denotational semantics based on the small-step abstract machine for Core Scheme presented by Clinger at PLDI'98. Starting from a functional implementation of this small-step abstract machine, (1) we fuse its transition function with its driver loop, obtaining the functional implementation of a big-step abstract machine; (2) we adjust this big-step abstract machine so that it is in defunctionalized form, obtaining the functional implementation of a second big-step abstract machine; (3) we refunctionalize this adjusted abstract machine, obtaining the functional implementation of a natural semantics in continuation style; and (4) we closure-unconvert this natural semantics, obtaining a compositional continuation-passing evaluation function which we identify as the functional implementation of a denotational semantics in continuation style. We then compare this valuation function with that of Clinger's original denotational semantics of Scheme

Correctness of an STM Haskell implementation

A concurrent implementation of software transactional memory in Concurrent Haskell using a call-by-need functional language with processes and futures is given. The description of the small-step operational semantics is precise and explicit, and employs an early abort of conflicting transactions. A proof of correctness of the implementation is given for a contextual semantics with may- and should-convergence. This implies that our implementation is a correct evaluator for an abstract specification equipped with a big-step semantics

Coinductive big-step operational semantics

Using a call-by-value functional language as an example, this article illustrates the use of coinductive definitions and proofs in big-step operational semantics, enabling it to describe diverging evaluations in addition to terminating evaluations. We formalize the connections between the coinductive big-step semantics and the standard small-step semantics, proving that both semantics are equivalent. We then study the use of coinductive big-step semantics in proofs of type soundness and proofs of semantic preservation for compilers. A methodological originality of this paper is that all results have been proved using the Coq proof assistant. We explain the proof-theoretic presentation of coinductive definitions and proofs offered by Coq, and show that it facilitates the discovery and the presentation of the results

On the Equivalence between Small-Step and Big-Step Abstract Machines: A Simple Application of Lightweight Fusion

We show how Ohori and Sasano's recent lightweight fusion by fixed-point promotion provides a simple way to prove the equivalence of the two standard styles of specification of abstract machines: (1) in small-step form, as a state-transition function together with a `driver loop,' i.e., a function implementing the iteration of this transition function; and (2) in big-step form, as a tail-recursive function that directly maps a given configuration to a final state, if any. The equivalence hinges on our observation that for abstract machines, fusing a small-step specification yields a big-step specification. We illustrate this observation here with a recognizer for Dyck words, the CEK machine, and Krivine's machine with call/cc. The need for such a simple proof is motivated by our current work on small-step abstract machines as obtained by refocusing a function implementing a reduction semantics (a syntactic correspondence), and big-step abstract machines as obtained by CPS-transforming and then defunctionalizing a function implementing a big-step semantics (a functional correspondence)

On Computational Small Steps and Big Steps: Refocusing for Outermost Reduction

We study the relationship between small-step semantics, big-step semantics and abstract machines, for programming languages that employ an outermost reduction strategy, i.e., languages where reductions near the root of the abstract syntax tree are performed before reductions near the leaves.In particular, we investigate how Biernacka and Danvy's syntactic correspondence and Reynolds's functional correspondence can be applied to inter-derive semantic specifications for such languages.The main contribution of this dissertation is three-fold:First, we identify that backward overlapping reduction rules in the small-step semantics cause the refocusing step of the syntactic correspondence to be inapplicable.Second, we propose two solutions to overcome this in-applicability: backtracking and rule generalization.Third, we show how these solutions affect the other transformations of the two correspondences.Other contributions include the application of the syntactic and functional correspondences to Boolean normalization.In particular, we show how to systematically derive a spectrum of normalization functions for negational and conjunctive normalization

An Investigation of Abadi and Cardelli's Untyped Calculus of Objects

We study the relationship between the natural (big-step) semantics and the reduction (small-step) semantics of Abadi and Cardelli's untyped calculus of objects. By applying Danvy et al.'s functional correspondence to the natural semantics, we derive an abstract machine for this calculus, and by applying Danvy et al.'s syntactic correspondence to the reduction semantics, we also derive an abstract machines for this calculus. These two abstract machines are identical. The fact that the machines are identical, and the fact that they have been derived using meaning-preserving program transformations, entail that the derivation constitutes a proof of equivalence between natural semantics and the reduction semantics. The derivational nature of our proof contrasts with Abadi and Cardelli's soundness proof, which was carried out by pen and paper. We also note that the abstract machine is new. To move closer to actual language implementations, we reformulate the calculus to use explicit substitutions. The reformulated calculus is new. By applying the functional and syntactic correspondences to natural and reduction semantics of this new calculus, we again obtain two abstract machines. These two machines are also identical, and as such, they establish the equivalence of the natural semantics and the reduction semantics of the new calculus. Finally, we prove that the two abstract machines are strongly bisimilar. Therefore, the two calculi are computationally equivalent

First Class Call Stacks: Exploring Head Reduction

Weak-head normalization is inconsistent with functional extensionality in the call-by-name $\lambda$-calculus. We explore this problem from a new angle via the conflict between extensionality and effects. Leveraging ideas from work on the $\lambda$-calculus with control, we derive and justify alternative operational semantics and a sequence of abstract machines for performing head reduction. Head reduction avoids the problems with weak-head reduction and extensionality, while our operational semantics and associated abstract machines show us how to retain weak-head reduction's ease of implementation.Comment: In Proceedings WoC 2015, arXiv:1606.0583