Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userFrom F to DOT: Type Soundness Proofs with Definitional Interpreters
153
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Tiark Rompf
Publication date
2015
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Scalas type system unifies ML modules, object-oriented, and functional programming. The Dependent Object Types (DOT) family of calculi has been proposed as a new foundation for Scala and similar languages. Unfortunately, it is not clear how DOT relates to any well-known type systems, and type soundness has only been established for very restricted subsets. In fact, important Scala features are known to break at least one key metatheoretic property such as environment narrowing or subtyping transitivity, which are usually required for a type soundness proof. First, and, perhaps surprisingly, we show how rich DOT calculi can still be proved sound. The key insight is that narrowing and subtyping transitivity only need to hold for runtime objects, but not for code that is never executed. Alas, the dominant method of proving type soundness, Wright and Felleisens syntactic approach, is based on term rewriting, which does not a priori make a distinction between runtime and type assignment time. Second, we demonstrate how type soundness can be proved for advanced, polymorphic, type systems with respect to high-level, definitional interpreters, implemented in Coq. We present the first mechanized soundness proof in this style for System F<: and several extensions, including mutable references. Our proofs use only simple induction: another surprising result, as the combination of big-step semantics, mutable references, and polymorphism is commonly believed to require co-inductive proof techniques. Third, we show how DOT-like calculi emerge as generalizations of F<:, exposing a rich design space of calculi with path-dependent types which we collectively call System D. Armed with insights from the definitional interpreter semantics, we also show how equivalent small-step semantics and soundness proofs in Wright-Felleisen-style can be derived for these systems.
rate research
Read More
Nondeterminism in scheduling is the cardinal reason for difficulty in proving correctness of concurrent programs. A powerful proof strategy was recently proposed [6] to show the correctness of such programs. The approach captured data-flow dependencies among the instructions of an interleaved and error-free execution of threads. These data-flow dependencies were represented by an inductive data-flow graph (iDFG), which, in a nutshell, denotes a set of executions of the concurrent program that gave rise to the discovered data-flow dependencies. The iDFGs were further transformed in to alternative finite automatons (AFAs) in order to utilize efficient automata-theoretic tools to solve the problem. In this paper, we give a novel and efficient algorithm to directly construct AFAs that capture the data-flow dependencies in a concurrent program execution. We implemented the algorithm in a tool called ProofTraPar to prove the correctness of finite state cyclic programs under the sequentially consistent memory model. Our results are encouranging and compare favorably to existing state-of-the-art tools.
Coroutines are a general control flow construct that can eliminate control flow fragmentation inherent in event-driven programs, and are still missing in many popular languages. Coroutines with snapshots are a first-class, type-safe, stackful coroutine model, which unifies many variants of suspendable computing, and is sufficiently general to express iterators, single-assignment variables, async-await, actors, event streams, backtracking, symmetric coroutines and continuations. In this paper, we develop a formal model called $lambda_{rightsquigarrow}$ (lambda-squiggly) that captures the essence of type-safe, stackful, delimited coroutines with snapshots. We prove the standard progress and preservation safety properties. Finally, we show a formal transformation from the $lambda_{rightsquigarrow}$ calculus to the simply-typed lambda calculus with references.
We propose a general proof technique to show that a predicate is sound, that is, prevents stuck computation, with respect to a big-step semantics. This result may look surprising, since in big-step semantics there is no difference between non-terminating and stuck computations, hence soundness cannot even be expressed. The key idea is to define constructions yielding an extended version of a given arbitrary big-step semantics, where the difference is made explicit. The extended semantics are exploited in the meta-theory, notably they are necessary to show that the proof technique works. However, they remain transparent when using the proof technique, since it consists in checking three conditions on the original rules only, as we illustrate by several examples.
Verifying partial (i.e., termination-insensitive) equivalence of programs has significant practical applications in software development and education. Conventional equivalence verifiers typically rely on a combination of given relational summaries and suggested synchronization points; such information can be extremely difficult for programmers without a background in formal methods to provide for pairs of programs with dissimilar logic. In this work, we propose a completely automated verifier for determining partial equivalence, named Pequod. Pequod automatically synthesizes expressive proofs of equivalence conventionally only achievable via careful, manual constructions of product programs To do so, Pequod syntheses relational proofs for selected pairs of program paths and combines the per-path relational proofs to synthesize relational program invariants. To evaluate Pequod, we implemented it as a tool that targets Java Virtual Machine bytecode and applied it to verify the equivalence of hundreds of pairs of solutions submitted by students for problems hosted on popular online coding platforms, most of which could not be verified by existing techniques.
The automatic verification of programs that maintain unbounded low-level data structures is a critical and open problem. Analyzers and verifiers developed in previous work can synthesize invariants that only describe data structures of heavily restricted forms, or require an analyst to provide predicates over program data and structure that are used in a synthesized proof of correctness. In this work, we introduce a novel automatic safety verifier of programs that maintain low-level data structures, named LTTP. LTTP synthesizes proofs of program safety represented as a grammar of a given programs control paths, annotated with invariants that relate program state at distinct points within its path of execution. LTTP synthesizes such proofs completely automatically, using a novel inductive-synthesis algorithm. We have implemented LTTP as a verifier for JVM bytecode and applied it to verify the safety of a collection of verification benchmarks. Our results demonstrate that LTTP can be applied to automatically verify the safety of programs that are beyond the scope of previously-developed verifiers.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
