Adding Polymorphic Abstraction to ML (Detailed Abstract)

The ML programming language restricts type polymorphism to occur only in the "let-in" construct and requires every occurrence of a formal parameter of a function (a lambda abstraction) to have the same type. Milner in 1978 refers to this restriction (which was adopted to help ML achieve automatic type inference) as a serious limitation. We show that this restriction can be relaxed enough to allow universal polymorphic abstraction without losing automatic type inference. This extension is equivalent to the rank-2 fragment of system F. We precisely characterize the additional program phrases (lambda terms) that can be typed with this extension and we describe typing anomalies both before and after the extension. We discuss how macros may be used to gain some of the power of rank-3 types without losing automatic type inference. We also discuss user-interface problems in how to inform the programmer of the possible types a program phrase may have.

Programming Examples Needing Polymorphic Recursion

Inferring types for polymorphic recursive function definitions (abbreviated to polymorphic recursion) is a recurring topic on the mailing lists of popular typed programming languages. This is despite the fact that type inference for polymorphic recursion using for all-types has been proved undecidable. This report presents several programming examples involving polymorphic recursion and determines their typability under various type systems, including the Hindley-Milner system, an intersection-type system, and extensions of these two. The goal of this report is to show that many of these examples are typable using a system of intersection types as an alternative form of polymorphism. By accomplishing this, we hope to lay the foundation for future research into a decidable intersection-type inference algorithm. We do not provide a comprehensive survey of type systems appropriate for polymorphic recursion, with or without type annotations inserted in the source language. Rather, we focus on examples for which types may be inferred without type annotations.

System F with Constraint Types

System F is a type system that can be seen as both a proof system for second-order propositional logic and as a polymorphic programming language. In this work we explore several extensions of System F by types which express subtyping constraints. These systems include terms which represent proofs of subtyping relationships between types. Given a proof that one type is a subtype of another, one may use a coercion term constructor to coerce terms from the first type to the second. The ability to manipulate type constraints as first-class entities gives these systems a lot of expressive power, including the ability to encode generalized algebraic data types and intensional type analysis. The main contributions of this work are in the formulation of constraint types and a proof of strong normalization for an extension of System F with constraint types.

Faithful Translations between Polyvariant Flows and Polymorphic Types

Recent work has shown equivalences between various type systems and flow logics. Ideally, the translations upon which such equivalences are based should be faithful in the sense that information is not lost in round-trip translations from flows to types and back or from types to flows and back. Building on the work of Nielson & Nielson and of Palsberg & Pavlopoulou, we present the first faithful translations between a class of finitary polyvariant flow analyses and a type system supporting polymorphism in the form of intersection and union types. Additionally, our flow/type correspondence solves several open problems posed by Palsberg & Pavlopoulou: (1) it expresses call-string based polyvariance (such as k-CFA) as well as argument based polyvariance; (2) it enjoys a subject reduction property for flows as well as for types; and (3) it supports a flow-oriented perspective rather than a type-oriented one.

Safe Compositional Specification of Network Systems With Polymorphic, Constrained Types

In the framework of iBench research project, our previous work created a domain specific language TRAFFIC [6] that facilitates specification, programming, and maintenance of distributed applications over a network. It allows safety property to be formalized in terms of types and subtyping relations. Extending upon our previous work, we add Hindley-Milner style polymorphism [8] with constraints [9] to the type system of TRAFFIC. This allows a programmer to use for-all quantifier to describe types of network components, escalating power and expressiveness of types to a new level that was not possible before with propositional subtyping relations. Furthermore, we design our type system with a pluggable constraint system, so it can adapt to different application needs while maintaining soundness. In this paper, we show the soundness of the type system, which is not syntax-directed but is easier to do typing derivation. We show that there is an equivalent syntax-directed type system, which is what a type checker program would implement to verify the safety of a network flow. This is followed by discussion on several constraint systems: polymorphism with subtyping constraints, Linear Programming, and Constraint Handling Rules (CHR) [3]. Finally, we provide some examples to illustrate workings of these constraint systems.