56 research outputs found

    First-Class Subtypes

    Full text link
    First class type equalities, in the form of generalized algebraic data types (GADTs), are commonly found in functional programs. However, first-class representations of other relations between types, such as subtyping, are not yet directly supported in most functional programming languages. We present several encodings of first-class subtypes using existing features of the OCaml language (made more convenient by the proposed modular implicits extension), show that any such encodings are interconvertible, and illustrate the utility of the encodings with several examples.Comment: In Proceedings ML 2017, arXiv:1905.0590

    Programming Languages and Systems

    Full text link

    Sound and complete bidirectional typechecking for higher-rank polymorphism with existentials and indexed types

    Get PDF
    Bidirectional typechecking, in which terms either synthesize a type or are checked against a known type, has become popular for its applicability to a variety of type systems, its error reporting, and its ease of implementation. Following principles from proof theory, bidirectional typing can be applied to many type constructs. The principles underlying a bidirectional approach to indexed types (generalized algebraic datatypes) are less clear. Building on proof-theoretic treatments of equality, we give a declarative specification of typing based on focalization. This approach permits declarative rules for coverage of pattern matching, as well as support for first-class existential types using a focalized subtyping judgment. We use refinement types to avoid explicitly passing equality proofs in our term syntax, making our calculus similar to languages such as Haskell and OCaml. We also extend the declarative specification with an explicit rules for deducing when a type is principal, permitting us to give a complete declarative specification for a rich type system with significant type inference. We also give a set of algorithmic typing rules, and prove that it is sound and complete with respect to the declarative system. The proof requires a number of technical innovations, including proving soundness and completeness in a mutually recursive fashion.EPSRC grant EP/N02706X/

    Hidden Type Variables and Conditional Extension for More Expressive Generic Programs

    Full text link
    Generic object-oriented programming languages combine parametric polymorphism and nominal subtype polymorphism, thereby providing better data abstraction, greater code reuse, and fewer run-time errors. However, most generic object-oriented languages provide a straightforward combination of the two kinds of polymorphism, which prevents the expression of advanced type relationships. Furthermore, most generic object-oriented languages have a type-erasure semantics: instantiations of type parameters are not available at run time, and thus may not be used by type-dependent operations. This dissertation shows that two features, which allow the expression of many advanced type relationships, can be added to a generic object-oriented programming language without type erasure: 1. type variables that are not parameters of the class that declares them, and 2. extension that is dependent on the satisfiability of one or more constraints. We refer to the first feature as hidden type variables and the second feature as conditional extension. Hidden type variables allow: covariance and contravariance without variance annotations or special type arguments such as wildcards; a single type to extend, and inherit methods from, infinitely many instantiations of another type; a limited capacity to augment the set of superclasses after that class is defined; and the omission of redundant type arguments. Conditional extension allows the properties of a collection type to be dependent on the properties of its element type. This dissertation describes the semantics and implementation of hidden type variables and conditional extension. A sound type system is presented. In addition, a sound and terminating type checking algorithm is presented. Although designed for the Fortress programming language, hidden type variables and conditional extension can be incorporated into other generic object-oriented languages. Many of the same problems would arise, and solutions analogous to those we present would apply

    Lower your guards: a compositional pattern-match coverage checker

    Get PDF

    Revisiting Language Support for Generic Programming: When Genericity Is a Core Design Goal

    Get PDF
    Context Generic programming, as defined by Stepanov, is a methodology for writing efficient and reusable algorithms by considering only the required properties of their underlying data types and operations. Generic programming has proven to be an effective means of constructing libraries of reusable software components in languages that support it. Generics-related language design choices play a major role in how conducive generic programming is in practice. Inquiry Several mainstream programming languages (e.g. Java and C++) were first created without generics; features to support generic programming were added later, gradually. Much of the existing literature on supporting generic programming focuses thus on retrofitting generic programming into existing languages and identifying related implementation challenges. Is the programming experience significantly better, or different when programming with a language designed for generic programming without limitations from prior language design choices? Approach We examine Magnolia, a language designed to embody generic programming. Magnolia is representative of an approach to language design rooted in algebraic specifications. We repeat a well-known experiment, where we put Magnolia’s generic programming facilities under scrutiny by implementing a subset of the Boost Graph Library, and reflect on our development experience. Knowledge We discover that the idioms identified as key features for supporting Stepanov-style generic programming in the previous studies and work on the topic do not tell a full story. We clarify which of them are more of a means to an end, rather than fundamental features for supporting generic programming. Based on the development experience with Magnolia, we identify variadics as an additional key feature for generic programming and point out limitations and challenges of genericity by property. Grounding Our work uses a well-known framework for evaluating the generic programming facilities of a language from the literature to evaluate the algebraic approach through Magnolia, and we draw comparisons with well-known programming languages. Importance This work gives a fresh perspective on generic programming, and clarifies what are fundamental language properties and their trade-offs when considering supporting Stepanov-style generic programming. The understanding of how to set the ground for generic programming will inform future language design.publishedVersio

    Partial type constructors: Or, making ad hoc datatypes less ad hoc

    Get PDF
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.Functional programming languages assume that type constructors are total. Yet functional programmers know better: counterexamples range from container types that make limiting assumptions about their contents (e.g., requiring computable equality or ordering functions) to type families with defining equations only over certain choices of arguments. We present a language design and formal theory of partial type constructors, capturing the domains of type constructors using qualified types. Our design is both simple and expressive: we support partial datatypes as first-class citizens (including as instances of parametric abstractions, such as the Haskell Functor and Monad classes), and show a simple type elaboration algorithm that avoids placing undue annotation burden on programmers. We show that our type system rejects ill-defined types and can be compiled to a semantic model based on System F. Finally, we have conducted an experimental analysis of a body of Haskell code, using a proof-of-concept implementation of our system; while there are cases where our system requires additional annotations, these cases are rarely encountered in practical Haskell code

    Safe Zero-cost Coercions for Haskell

    Get PDF
    Generative type abstractions – present in Haskell, OCaml, and other languages – are useful concepts to help prevent programmer errors. They serve to create new types that are distinct at compile time but share a run-time representation with some base type. We present a new mechanism that allows for zero-cost conversions between generative type abstractions and their representations, even when such types are deeply nested. We prove type safety in the presence of these conversions and have implemented our work in GHC

    Safe Zero-cost Coercions for Haskell

    Get PDF
    Generative type abstractions – present in Haskell, OCaml, and other languages – are useful concepts to help prevent programmer errors. They serve to create new types that are distinct at compile time but share a run-time representation with some base type. We present a new mechanism that allows for zero-cost conversions between generative type abstractions and their representations, even when such types are deeply nested. We prove type safety in the presence of these conversions and have implemented our work in GHC
    corecore