A formal soundness proof of region-based memory management for object-oriented paradigm.

Region-based memory management has been proposed as a viable alternative to garbage collection for real-time applications and embedded software. In our previous work we have developed a region type inference algorithm that provides an automatic compile-time region-based memory management for object-oriented paradigm. In this work we present a formal soundness proof of the region type system that is the target of our region inference. More precisely, we prove that the object-oriented programs accepted by our region type system achieve region-based memory management in a safe way. That means, the regions follow a stack-of-regions discipline and regions deallocation never create dangling references in the store and on the program stack. Our contribution is to provide a simple syntactic proof that is based on induction and follows the standard steps of a type safety proof. In contrast the previous safety proofs provided for other region type systems employ quite elaborate techniques

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

Handling polymorphic algebraic effects

Algebraic effects and handlers are a powerful abstraction mechanism to represent and implement control effects. In this work, we study their extension with parametric polymorphism that allows abstracting not only expressions but also effects and handlers. Although polymorphism makes it possible to reuse and reason about effect implementations more effectively, it has long been known that a naive combination of polymorphic effects and let-polymorphism breaks type safety. Although type safety can often be gained by restricting let-bound expressions---e.g., by adopting value restriction or weak polymorphism---we propose a complementary approach that restricts handlers instead of let-bound expressions. Our key observation is that, informally speaking, a handler is safe if resumptions from the handler do not interfere with each other. To formalize our idea, we define a call-by-value lambda calculus that supports let-polymorphism and polymorphic algebraic effects and handlers, design a type system that rejects interfering handlers, and prove type safety of our calculus.Comment: Added the errata for the ESOP'19 paper (page 28

Type-based allocation analysis for co-recursion in lazy functional languages

This paper presents a novel type-and-effect analysis for pre-dicting upper-bounds on memory allocation costs for co-recursive def-initions in a simple lazily-evaluated functional language. We show thesoundness of this system against an instrumented variant of Launch-bury’s semantics for lazy evaluation which serves as a formal cost model.Our soundness proof requires an intermediate semantics employing indi-rections. Our proof of correspondence between these semantics that weprovide is thus a crucial part of this work.The analysis has been implemented as an automatic inference system.We demonstrate its effectiveness using several example programs thatpreviously could not be automatically analysed.Postprin

Reusable Components of Semantic Specifications

Semantic specifications of programming languages typically have poor modularity. This hinders reuse of parts of the semantics of one language when specifying a different language – even when the two languages have many constructs in common – and evolution of a language may require major reformulation of its semantics. Such drawbacks have discouraged language developers from using formal semantics to document their designs. In the PLanCompS project, we have developed a component-based approach to semantics. Here, we explain its modularity aspects, and present an illustrative case study: a component-based semantics for Caml Light. We have tested the correctness of the semantics by running programs on an interpreter generated from the semantics, comparing the output with that produced on the standard implementation of the language. Our approach provides good modularity, facilitates reuse, and should support co-evolution of languages and their formal semantics. It could be particularly useful in connection with domain-specific languages and language-driven software development