LEAP: A language with eval and polymorphism

Pfenning, Frank; Lee, Peter

doi:10.1007/3-540-50940-2_46

Cited by 23 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…But it is not clear that self-interpretation can be achieved in such languages [11]. A more pressing practical concern is that such systems lose decidable type inference, which is a highly-valued feature of many typed functional programming languages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Tag Elimination and Jones-Optimality

Taha

Makholm

Hughes³

2001

Programs as Data Objects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Tag elimination is a program transformation for removing unnecessary tagging and untagging operations from automatically generated programs. Tag elimination was recently proposed as having immediate applications in implementations of domain specific languages (where it can give a two-fold speedup), and may provide a solution to the long standing problem of Jones-optimal specialization in the typed setting. This paper explains in more detail the role of tag elimination in the implementation of domain-specific languages, presents a number of significant simplifications and a high-level, higher-order, typed self-applicable interpreter. We show how tag elimination achieves Jones-optimality.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Tag Elimination and Jones-Optimality

Taha

Makholm

Hughes³

2001

Programs as Data Objects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The "standard" strategies treat constructor abstractions as values and constructor applications as significant computation steps. Standard strategies in this sense are used in Quest [41 and LEAP [35], and are directly compatible with extensions that make significant uses of types at run time (for example, "dynamic" types [1,4]). Since polymorphic expressions are kept distinct from their instances, the anomalies that arise in implicitly polymorphic languages in the presence of references [45] and control operators [18] do not occur.…”

Section: Operational Semantics For F -+Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent languages, notably Quest [4] and LEAP [35], are based instead on the notion of ezplicit polymorphism introduced by Girard and Reynolds [39]. In these languages, types are an intrinsic part of the programming notation; in particular, polymorphic abstraction and application are expression-forming operations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Extensions and variations of F, lie at the core of Quest [4] and LEAP [35], and it is the underlying programming language of the Calculus of Constructions [6,33]. We extend F,, with contrc.1 primitives in order to illustrate the role of "impure" programming language features in the analysis of typing properties of realistic programming languages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Explicit Polymorphism and CPS Conversion,

Harper¹,

Lillibridge²

1992

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study the typing properties of CPS conversion for an extension of F, with control operators. Two classes of evaluation strategies are considered, each with call-by-name and call-by-value variants. Under the "standard" strategies, constructor abstractions are values, and constructor applications can lead to non-trivial control effects. In contrast, the "ML-like" strategies evaluate beneath constructor abstractions, reflecting the usual interpretation of programs in languages based on implicit polymorphism. Three continuation passing style sub-languages are considered, one on which the standard strategies coincide, one on which the ML-like strategies coincide, and one on which all the strategies coincide. Compositional, type-preserving CPS transformation algorithms are given for the standard strategies, resulting in terms on which all evaluation strategies coincide. This has as a corollary the soundness and termination of well-typed programs under the standard evaluation strategies. A similar result is obtained for the ML-like ca-by-name strategy. In contrast, such results are obtained for the call-by value ML-like strategy only for a restricted sub-language in which constructor abstractions are limited to values.

show abstract

“…We note, however, that F a is not simply an esoteric variation on F 2 , since it has been proposed as the mathematical foundation for a new generation of typed functional programming languages, for example Cardelli's (1989) language Quest, and the language LEAP of Pfenning and Lee (1989). The practical use of such languages, however, is considerably hampered by the absence of any type inference algorithm, forcing the programmer into detail and debugging of types as well as of the program.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The complexity of type inference for higher-order typed lambda calculi

Henglein

Mairson

1994

J. Funct. Prog.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyse the computational complexity of type inference for untyped X,-terms in the secondorder polymorphic typed X-calculus (F 2 ) invented by Girard and Reynolds, as well as higherorder extensions F 3 ,F 4 , ...,/^ proposed by Girard. We prove that recognising the i^-typable terms requires exponential time, and for F a the problem is non-elementary. We show as well a sequence of lower bounds on recognising the i^-typable terms, where the bound for F k+1 is exponentially larger than that for F k .The lower bounds are based on generic simulation of Turing Machines, where computation is simulated at the expression and type level simultaneously. Non-accepting computations are mapped to non-normalising reduction sequences, and hence non-typable terms. The accepting computations are mapped to typable terms, where higher-order types encode reduction sequences, and first-order types encode the entire computation as a circuit, based on a unification simulation of Boolean logic. A primary technical tool in this reduction is the composition of polymorphic functions having different domains and ranges.These results are the first nontrivial lower bounds on type inference for the Girard/Reynolds system as well as its higher-order extensions. We hope that the analysis provides important combinatorial insights which will prove useful in the ultimate resolution of the complexity of the type inference problem. Capsule reviewThe polymorphic X-calculi F 2 ,F 3 , ...,F W form a useful foundation for the study of modern programming languages. Since the utility of a language's type system depends heavily on being able to ensure type correctness at compile time, the study of the complexity of type inference for F 2 , F 3 , ...,i^ is well motivated. This paper takes a significant step forward by establishing interesting lower bounds for type inference for this class of languages. Although the f A preliminary version of this work appeared in the

show abstract

LEAP: A language with eval and polymorphism

Cited by 23 publications

References 16 publications

Tag Elimination and Jones-Optimality

Tag Elimination and Jones-Optimality

Explicit Polymorphism and CPS Conversion,

The complexity of type inference for higher-order typed lambda calculi

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About