Reaching for the Star: Tale of a Monad in Coq

Monadic programming is an essential component in the toolbox of functional programmers. For the pure and total programmers, who sometimes navigate the waters of certified programming in type theory, it is the only means to concisely implement the imperative traits of certain algorithms. Monads open up a portal to the imperative world, all that from the comfort of the functional world. The trend towards certified programming within type theory begs the question of reasoning about such programs. Effectful programs being encoded as pure programs in the host type theory, we can readily manipulate these objects through their encoding. In this article, we pursue the idea, popularized by Maillard [Kenji Maillard, 2019], that every monad deserves a dedicated program logic and that, consequently, a proof over a monadic program ought to take place within a Floyd-Hoare logic built for the occasion. We illustrate this vision through a case study on the SimplExpr module of CompCert [Xavier Leroy, 2009], using a separation logic tailored to reason about the freshness of a monadic gensym

Modules over Monads and Operational Semantics

This paper is a contribution to the search for efficient and high-level mathematical tools to specify and reason about (abstract) programming languages or calculi. Generalising the reduction monads of Ahrens et al., we introduce transition monads, thus covering new applications such as ???-calculus, ?-calculus, Positive GSOS specifications, differential ?-calculus, and the big-step, simply-typed, call-by-value ?-calculus. Finally, we design a suitable notion of signature for transition monads

Modules over monads and operational semantics

This paper is a contribution to the search for efficient and high-level mathematical tools to specify and reason about (abstract) programming languages or calculi. Generalising the reduction monads of Ahrens et al., we introduce transition monads, thus covering new applications such as lambda-bar-mu-calculus, pi-calculus, Positive GSOS specifications, differential lambda-calculus, and the big-step, simply-typed, call-by-value lambda-calculus. Moreover, we design a suitable notion of signature for transition monads

Fundamental Constructs in Programming Languages

Specifying the semantics of a programming language formally can have many benefits. However, it can also require a huge effort. The effort can be significantly reduced by translating language syntax to so-called fundamental constructs (funcons). A translation to funcons is easy to update when the language evolves, and it exposes relationships between individual language constructs. The PLanCompS project has developed an initial collection of funcons (primarily for translation of functional and imperative languages). The behaviour of each funcon is defined, once and for all, using a modular variant of structural operational semantics. The definitions are available online. This paper introduces and motivates funcons. It illustrates translation of language constructs to funcons, and how funcons are defined. It also relates funcons to notation used in previous frameworks, including monadic semantics and action semantics.Comment: 20 pages plus appendix, submitted to ISoLA 202

Reduction Monads and Their Signatures

International audienc

Abstract Clones for Abstract Syntax

We give a formal treatment of simple type theories, such as the simply-typed ?-calculus, using the framework of abstract clones. Abstract clones traditionally describe first-order structures, but by equipping them with additional algebraic structure, one can further axiomatize second-order, variable-binding operators. This provides a syntax-independent representation of simple type theories. We describe multisorted second-order presentations, such as the presentation of the simply-typed ?-calculus, and their clone-theoretic algebras; free algebras on clones abstractly describe the syntax of simple type theories quotiented by equations such as ?- and ?-equality. We give a construction of free algebras and derive a corresponding induction principle, which facilitates syntax-independent proofs of properties such as adequacy and normalization for simple type theories. Working only with clones avoids some of the complexities inherent in presheaf-based frameworks for abstract syntax

Reasoning about the garden of forking paths

Lazy evaluation is a powerful tool for functional programmers. It enables the concise expression of on-demand computation and a form of compositionality not available under other evaluation strategies. However, the stateful nature of lazy evaluation makes it hard to analyze a program's computational cost, either informally or formally. In this work, we present a novel and simple framework for formally reasoning about lazy computation costs based on a recent model of lazy evaluation: clairvoyant call-by-value. The key feature of our framework is its simplicity, as expressed by our definition of the clairvoyance monad. This monad is both simple to define (around 20 lines of Coq) and simple to reason about. We show that this monad can be effectively used to mechanically reason about the computational cost of lazy functional programs written in Coq.Comment: 28 pages, accepted by ICFP'2

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