Finding The Lazy Programmer's Bugs

Traditionally developers and testers created huge numbers of explicit tests, enumerating interesting cases, perhaps biased by what they believe to be the current boundary conditions of the function being tested. Or at least, they were supposed to. A major step forward was the development of property testing. Property testing requires the user to write a few functional properties that are used to generate tests, and requires an external library or tool to create test data for the tests. As such many thousands of tests can be created for a single property. For the purely functional programming language Haskell there are several such libraries; for example QuickCheck [CH00], SmallCheck and Lazy SmallCheck [RNL08]. Unfortunately, property testing still requires the user to write explicit tests. Fortunately, we note there are already many implicit tests present in programs. Developers may throw assertion errors, or the compiler may silently insert runtime exceptions for incomplete pattern matches. We attempt to automate the testing process using these implicit tests. Our contributions are in four main areas: (1) We have developed algorithms to automatically infer appropriate constructors and functions needed to generate test data without requiring additional programmer work or annotations. (2) To combine the constructors and functions into test expressions we take advantage of Haskell's lazy evaluation semantics by applying the techniques of needed narrowing and lazy instantiation to guide generation. (3) We keep the type of test data at its most general, in order to prevent committing too early to monomorphic types that cause needless wasted tests. (4) We have developed novel ways of creating Haskell case expressions to inspect elements inside returned data structures, in order to discover exceptions that may be hidden by laziness, and to make our test data generation algorithm more expressive. In order to validate our claims, we have implemented these techniques in Irulan, a fully automatic tool for generating systematic black-box unit tests for Haskell library code. We have designed Irulan to generate high coverage test suites and detect common programming errors in the process

Monadic Augment And Generalized Short Cut Fusion

Monads are commonplace programming devices that are used to uniformly structure computations;in particular, they are often used to mimic the effects of impure features suchas state, error handling, and I/O. This paper further develops the monadic programmingparadigm by investigating the extent to which monadic computations can be optimisedby using generalisations of short cut fusion to eliminate monadic structures whose solepurpose is to \glue together" monadic program components.Ghani, Uustalu, and Vene have recently shown that every inductive type has an associatedbuild combinator and an associated short cut fusion rule. They have also used thenotion of a parameterised monad to describe those monads that give rise to inductive types,and have shown that the standard augment combinators and cata/augment fusion rulesfor algebraic data types can be generalised to xed points of all parameterised monads.We revisit these augment combinators and generalised short cut fusion rules for such typesbut consider them from a functional programming perspective, rather than a categoricalone. In addition to making the category-theoretic ideas of Ghani, Uustalu, and Venemore easily accessible to a wider audience of functional programmers, we demonstratetheir practical applicability by developing nontrivial application programs and performingmodest benchmarking on them. We also show how the cata/augment rules can serve asthe basis for deriving additional generic fusion laws, thus opening the way for an algebraof fusion. Finally, we oer deep theoretical insights, arguing that the augment combinatorsare monadic in nature, and thus that the cata/build and cata/augment rules arearguably the best generally applicable fusion rules obtainable

How functional programming mattered

In 1989 when functional programming was still considered a niche topic, Hughes wrote a visionary paper arguing convincingly ‘why functional programming matters’. More than two decades have passed. Has functional programming really mattered? Our answer is a resounding ‘Yes!’. Functional programming is now at the forefront of a new generation of programming technologies, and enjoying increasing popularity and influence. In this paper, we review the impact of functional programming, focusing on how it has changed the way we may construct programs, the way we may verify programs, and fundamentally the way we may think about programs

On the generation and analysis of program transformations

This thesis discusses the idea of using domain specific languages for program transformation, and the application, implementation and analysis of one such domain specific language that combines rewrite rules for transformation and uses temporal logic to express its side conditions. We have conducted three investigations. - An efficient implementation is described that is able to generate compiler optimizations from temporal logic specifications. Its description is accompanied by an empirical study of its performance. - We extend the fundamental ideas of this language to source code in order to write bug fixing transformations. Example transformations are given that fix common bugs within Java programs. The adaptations to the transformation language are described and a sample implementation which can apply these transformations is provided. - We describe an approach to the formal analysis of compiler optimizations that proves that the optimizations do not change the semantics of the program that they are optimizing. Some example proofs are included. The result of these combined investigations is greater than the sum of their parts. By demonstrating that a declarative language may be efficiently applied and formally reasoned about satisfies both theoretical and practical concerns, whilst our extension towards bug fixing shows more varied uses are possible

Preliminary proceedings of the 2001 ACM SIGPLAN Haskell workshop

This volume contains the preliminary proceedings of the 2001 ACM SIGPLAN Haskell Workshop, which was held on 2nd September 2001 in Firenze, Italy. The final proceedings will published by Elsevier Science as an issue of Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (Volume 59). The HaskellWorkshop was sponsored by ACM SIGPLAN and formed part of the PLI 2001 colloquium on Principles, Logics, and Implementations of high-level programming languages, which comprised the ICFP/PPDP conferences and associated workshops. Previous Haskell Workshops have been held in La Jolla (1995), Amsterdam (1997), Paris (1999), and Montr´eal (2000). The purpose of the Haskell Workshop was to discuss experience with Haskell, and possible future developments for the language. The scope of the workshop included all aspects of the design, semantics, theory, application, implementation, and teaching of Haskell. Submissions that discussed limitations of Haskell at present and/or proposed new ideas for future versions of Haskell were particularly encouraged. Adopting an idea from ICFP 2000, the workshop also solicited two special classes of submissions, application letters and functional pearls, described below