Dynamically typed languages

Dynamically typed languages such as Python and Ruby have experienced a rapid grown in popularity in recent times. However, there is much confusion as to what makes these languages interesting relative to statically typed languages, and little knowledge of their rich history. In this chapter I explore the general topic of dynamically typed languages, how they differ from statically typed languages, their history, and their defining features

statically checking structural constraints on Java programs

It is generally desirable to detect program errors as early as possible during software development. Statically typed languages allow many errors to be detected at compile-time. However, many errors that could be detected statically cannot be expressed using today’s type systems. In this paper, we describe a meta-programming framework for Java which allows for static checking of structural constraints. In particular, we address how design principles and coding rules can be captured

Dynamically typed languages.

Dynamically typed languages such as Python and Ruby have experienced a rapid grown in popularity in recent times. However, there is much confusion as to what makes these languages interesting relative to statically typed languages, and little knowledge of their rich history. In this chapter I explore the general topic of dynamically typed languages, how they differ from statically typed languages, their history, and their defining features

Fighting bit Rot with Types (Experience Report: Scala Collections)

We report on our experiences in redesigning Scala\u27s collection libraries, focussing on the role that type systems play in keeping software architectures coherent over time. Type systems can make software architecture more explicit but, if they are too weak, can also cause code duplication. We show that code duplication can be avoided using two of Scala\u27s type constructions: higher-kinded types and implicit parameters and conversions

Isabelle/PIDE as Platform for Educational Tools

The Isabelle/PIDE platform addresses the question whether proof assistants of the LCF family are suitable as technological basis for educational tools. The traditionally strong logical foundations of systems like HOL, Coq, or Isabelle have so far been counter-balanced by somewhat inaccessible interaction via the TTY (or minor variations like the well-known Proof General / Emacs interface). Thus the fundamental question of math education tools with fully-formal background theories has often been answered negatively due to accidental weaknesses of existing proof engines. The idea of "PIDE" (which means "Prover IDE") is to integrate existing provers like Isabelle into a larger environment, that facilitates access by end-users and other tools. We use Scala to expose the proof engine in ML to the JVM world, where many user-interfaces, editor frameworks, and educational tools already exist. This shall ultimately lead to combined mathematical assistants, where the logical engine is in the background, without obstructing the view on applications of formal methods, formalized mathematics, and math education in particular.Comment: In Proceedings THedu'11, arXiv:1202.453

Static, Lightweight Includes Resolution for PHP

Dynamic languages include a number of features that are challenging to model properly in static analysis tools. In PHP, one of these features is the include expression, where an arbitrary expression provides the path of the file to include at runtime. In this paper we present two complementary analyses for statically resolving PHP includes, one that works at the level of individual PHP files and one targeting PHP programs, possibly consisting of multiple scripts. To evaluate the effectiveness of these analyses we have applied the first to a corpus of 20 open-source systems, totaling more than 4.5 million lines of PHP, and the second to a number of programs from a subset of these systems. Our results show that, in many cases, includes can be either resolved to a specific file or a small subset of possible files, enabling better IDE features and more advanced program analysis tools for PHP

A Type System for Julia

The Julia programming language was designed to fill the needs of scientific computing by combining the benefits of productivity and performance languages. Julia allows users to write untyped scripts easily without needing to worry about many implementation details, as do other productivity languages. If one just wants to get the work done-regardless of how efficient or general the program might be, such a paradigm is ideal. Simultaneously, Julia also allows library developers to write efficient generic code that can run as fast as implementations in performance languages such as C or Fortran. This combination of user-facing ease and library developer-facing performance has proven quite attractive, and the language has increasing adoption. With adoption comes combinatorial challenges to correctness. Multiple dispatch -- Julia's key mechanism for abstraction -- allows many libraries to compose "out of the box." However, it creates bugs where one library's requirements do not match what another provides. Typing could address this at the cost of Julia's flexibility for scripting. I developed a "best of both worlds" solution: gradual typing for Julia. My system forms the core of a gradual type system for Julia, laying the foundation for improving the correctness of Julia programs while not getting in the way of script writers. My framework allows methods to be individually typed or untyped, allowing users to write untyped code that interacts with typed library code and vice versa. Typed methods then get a soundness guarantee that is robust in the presence of both dynamically typed code and dynamically generated definitions. I additionally describe protocols, a mechanism for typing abstraction over concrete implementation that accommodates one common pattern in Julia libraries, and describe its implementation into my typed Julia framework.Comment: PhD thesi

Structural abstraction: a mechanism for modular program construction

Abstraction mechanisms in programming languages aim to allow orthogonal pieces of functionality to be developed separately; complex software can then be constructed through the composition of these pieces. The effectiveness of such mechanisms lies in their support for modularity and reusability: The behavior of a piece of code should be reasoned about modularly---independently of the specific compositions it may participate in; the computation of a piece of code should allow specialization, so that it is reusable for different compositions. This dissertation introduces structural abstraction: a mechanism that advances the state of the art by allowing the writing of highly reusable code---code whose structure can be specialized per composition, while maintaining a high level of modularity. Structural abstraction provides a disciplined way for code to inspect the structure of its clients in composition, and declare its own structure accordingly. The hallmark feature of structural abstraction is that, despite its emphasis on greater reusability, it still allows modular type checking: A piece of structurally abstract code can be type-checked independently of its uses in compositions---an invaluable feature for highly reusable components that will be statically composed by other programmers. This dissertation introduces two structural abstraction techniques: static type conditions, and morphing. Static type conditions allow code to be conditionally declared based on subtyping constraints. A client of a piece of code can configure a desirable set of features by composing the code with types that satisfy the appropriate subtyping conditions. Morphing allows code to be iteratively declared, by statically reflecting over the structural members of code that it would be composed with. A morphing piece of code can mimic the structure of its clients in composition, or change its shape according to its clients in a pattern-based manner. Using either static type conditions or morphing, the structure of a piece of code is not statically determined, but can be automatically specialized by clients. Static type conditions and morphing both guarantee the modular type-safety of code: regardless of specific client configurations, code is guaranteed to be well-typed.Ph.D.Committee Chair: Yannis Smaragdakis; Committee Member: Oege de Moor; Committee Member: Richard LeBlanc; Committee Member: Santosh Pande; Committee Member: Spencer Rugabe

Programming with C++ concepts

AbstractThis paper explores the definition, applications, and limitations of concepts and concept maps in C++, with a focus on library composition. We also compare and contrast concepts to adaptation mechanisms in other languages.Efficient, non-intrusive adaptation mechanisms are essential when adapting data structures to a library’s API. Development with reusable components is a widely practiced method of building software. Components vary in form, ranging from source code to non-modifiable binary libraries. The Concepts language features, slated to appear in the next version of C++, have been designed with such compositions in mind, promising an improved ability to create generic, non-intrusive, efficient, and identity-preserving adapters.We report on two cases of data structure adaptation between different libraries, and illustrate best practices and idioms. First, we adapt GUI widgets from several libraries, with differing APIs, for use with a generic layout engine. We further develop this example to describe the run-time concept idiom, extending the applicability of concepts to domains where run-time polymorphism is required. Second, we compose an image processing library and a graph algorithm library, by making use of a transparent adaptation layer, enabling the efficient application of graph algorithms to the image processing domain. We use the adaptation layer to realize a few key algorithms, and report little or no performance degradation