Scope graphs are a promising generic framework to model the binding structures of programming languages, bridging formalization and implementation, supporting the definition of type checkers and the automation of type safety proofs. However, previous work on scope graphs has been limited to simple, nominal type systems. In this paper, we show that viewing scopes as types enables us to model the internal structure of types in a range of non-simple type systems (including structural records and generic classes) using the generic representation of scopes. Further, we show that relations between such types can be expressed in terms of generalized scope graph queries. We extend scope graphs with scoped relations and queries. We introduce Statix, a new domain-specific metalanguage for the specification of static semantics, based on scope graphs and constraints. We evaluate the scopes as types approach and the Statix design in case studies of the simply-typed lambda calculus with records, System F, and Featherweight Generic Java.

An intrinsically-typed definitional interpreter is a concise specification of dynamic semantics, that is executable and type safe by construction. Unfortunately, scaling intrinsicallytyped definitional interpreters to more complicated object languages often results in definitions that are cluttered with manual proof work. For linearly-typed languages (including session-typed languages) one has to prove that the interpreter, as well as all the operations on semantic components, treat values linearly. We present new methods and tools that make it possible to implement intrinsically-typed definitional interpreters for linearly-typed languages in a way that hides the majority of the manual proof work. Inspired by separation logic, we develop reusable and composable abstractions for programming with linear operations using dependent types. Using these abstractions, we define interpreters for linear lambda calculi with strong references, concurrency, and session-typed communication in Agda.

A definitional interpreter defines the semantics of an object language in terms of the (well-known) semantics of a host language, enabling understanding and validation of the semantics through execution. Combining a definitional interpreter with a separate type system requires a separate type safety proof. An alternative approach, at least for pure object languages, is to use a dependently-typed language to encode the object language type system in the definition of the abstract syntax. Using such intrinsically-typed abstract syntax definitions allows the host language type checker to verify automatically that the interpreter satisfies type safety. Does this approach scale to larger and more realistic object languages, and in particular to languages with mutable state and objects? In this paper, we describe and demonstrate techniques and libraries in Agda that successfully scale up intrinsically-typed definitional interpreters to handle rich object languages with non-trivial binding structures and mutable state. While the resulting interpreters are certainly more complex than the simply-typed λcalculus interpreter we start with, we claim that they still meet the goals of being concise, comprehensible, and executable, while guaranteeing type safety for more elaborate object languages. We make the following contributions: (1) A dependent-passing style technique for hiding the weakening of indexed values as they propagate through monadic code. (2) An Agda library for programming with scope graphs and frames, which provides a uniform approach to dealing with name binding in intrinsically-typed interpreters. (3) Case studies of intrinsically-typed definitional interpreters for the simply-typed λ-calculus with references (STLC+Ref) and for a large subset of Middleweight Java (MJ). CCS Concepts: • Theory of computation → Program verification; Type theory; • Software and its engineering → Formal language definitions;

interpretation is a technique for developing static analyses. Yet, proving abstract interpreters sound is challenging for interesting analyses, because of the high proof complexity and proof effort. To reduce complexity and effort, we propose a framework for abstract interpreters that makes their soundness proof compositional. Key to our approach is to capture the similarities between concrete and abstract interpreters in a single shared interpreter, parameterized over an arrow-based interface. In our framework, a soundness proof is reduced to proving reusable soundness lemmas over the concrete and abstract instances of this interface; the soundness of the overall interpreters follows from a generic theorem. To further reduce proof effort, we explore the relationship between soundness and parametricity. Parametricity not only provides us with useful guidelines for how to design non-leaky interfaces for shared interpreters, but also provides us soundness of shared pure functions as free theorems. We implemented our framework in Haskell and developed a k-CFA analysis for PCF and a tree-shape analysis for Stratego. We were able to prove both analyses sound compositionally with manageable complexity and effort, compared to a conventional soundness proof. CCS Concepts: • Software and its engineering → Automated static analysis; • Theory of computation → Proof theory;

Big-step semantics for languages with abrupt termination and/or divergence suffer from a serious duplication problem, addressed by the novel 'pretty-big-step' style presented by Charguéraud at ESOP'13. Such rules are less concise than corresponding small-step rules, but they have the same advantages as big-step rules for program correctness proofs. Here, we show how to automatically derive pretty-big-step rules directly from small-step rules by 'refocusing'. This gives the best of both worlds: we only need to write the relatively concise small-step specifications, but our reasoning can be big-step as well as small-step. The use of strictness annotations to derive small-step congruence rules gives further conciseness.