Results 1  10
of
74
Regular expression types for XML
"... We propose regular expression types as a foundation for statically typed XML processing languages. Regular expression types, like most schema languages for XML, introduce regular expression notations such as repetition (*), alternation (), etc., to describe XML documents. The novelty of our type sy ..."
Abstract

Cited by 210 (21 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We propose regular expression types as a foundation for statically typed XML processing languages. Regular expression types, like most schema languages for XML, introduce regular expression notations such as repetition (*), alternation (), etc., to describe XML documents. The novelty of our type system is a semantic presentation of subtyping, as inclusion between the sets of documents denoted by two types. We give several examples illustrating the usefulness of this form of subtyping in XML processing. The decision problem for the subtype relation reduces to the inclusion problem between tree automata, which is known to be exptimecomplete. To avoid this high complexity in typical cases, we develop a practical algorithm that, unlike classical algorithms based on determinization of tree automata, checks the inclusion relation by a topdown traversal of the original type expressions. The main advantage of this algorithm is that it can exploit the property that type expressions being compared often share portions of their representations. Our algorithm is a variant of Aiken and Murphy’s setinclusion constraint solver, to which are added several new implementation techniques, correctness proofs, and preliminary performance measurements on some small programs in the domain of typed XML processing.
On the Origins of Bisimulation and Coinduction
"... The origins of bisimulation and bisimilarity are examined, in the three fields where they have been ..."
Abstract

Cited by 61 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The origins of bisimulation and bisimilarity are examined, in the three fields where they have been
Types for Access Control
, 2000
"... KLAIM is an experimental programming language that supports a programming paradigm where both processes and data can be moved across di#erent computing environments. This paper presents the mathematical foundations of the KLAIM type system; this system permits checking access rights violations of mo ..."
Abstract

Cited by 60 (20 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
KLAIM is an experimental programming language that supports a programming paradigm where both processes and data can be moved across di#erent computing environments. This paper presents the mathematical foundations of the KLAIM type system; this system permits checking access rights violations of mobile agents. Types are used to describe the intentions (read, write, execute, :::) of processes relative to the di#erent localities with which they are willing to interact, or to which they want to migrate. Type checking then determines whether processes comply with the declared intentions, and whether they have been assigned the necessary rights to perform the intended operations at the speci#ed localities. The KLAIM type system encompasses both subtyping and recursively de#ned types. The former occurs naturally when considering hierarchies of access rights, while the latter is needed to model migration of recursive processes. c 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Recursive Subtyping Revealed
 Journal of Functional Programming
, 2000
"... Algorithms for checking subtyping between recursive types lie at the core of many programming language implementations. But the fundamental theory of these algorithms and how they relate to simpler declarative specifications is not widely understood, due in part to the difficulty of the available in ..."
Abstract

Cited by 43 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Algorithms for checking subtyping between recursive types lie at the core of many programming language implementations. But the fundamental theory of these algorithms and how they relate to simpler declarative specifications is not widely understood, due in part to the difficulty of the available introductions to the area. This tutorial paper offers an "endtoend" introduction to recursive types and subtyping algorithms, from basic theory to efficient implementation, set in the unifying mathematical framework of coinduction. 1. INTRODUCTION Recursively defined types in programming languages and lambdacalculi come in two distinct varieties. Consider, for example, the type X described by the equation X = Nat!(Nat\ThetaX): An element of X is a function that maps a number to a pair consisting of a number and a function of the same form. This type is often written more concisely as X.Nat!(Nat\ThetaX). A variety of familiar recursive types such as lists and trees can be defined analogou...
Practical RefinementType Checking
, 1997
"... Refinement types allow many more properties of programs to be expressed and statically checked than conventional type systems. We present a practical algorithm for refinementtype checking in a calculus enriched with refinementtype annotations. We prove that our basic algorithm is sound and comple ..."
Abstract

Cited by 37 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Refinement types allow many more properties of programs to be expressed and statically checked than conventional type systems. We present a practical algorithm for refinementtype checking in a calculus enriched with refinementtype annotations. We prove that our basic algorithm is sound and complete, and show that every term which has a refinement type can be annotated as required by our algorithm. Our positive experience with an implementation of an extension of this algorithm to the full core language of Standard ML demonstrates that refinement types can be a practical program development tool in a realistic programming language. The required refinement type definitions and annotations are not much of a burden and serve as formal, machinechecked explanations of code invariants which otherwise would remain implicit. 1 Introduction The advantages of staticallytyped programming languages are well known, and have been described many times (e.g. see [Car97]). However, conventional ty...
Semantic Types: A Fresh Look at the Ideal Model for Types
, 2004
"... We present a generalization of the ideal model for recursive polymorphic types. Types are defined as sets of terms instead of sets of elements of a semantic domain. Our proof of the existence of types (computed by fixpoint of a typing operator) does not rely on metric properties, but on the fact tha ..."
Abstract

Cited by 26 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present a generalization of the ideal model for recursive polymorphic types. Types are defined as sets of terms instead of sets of elements of a semantic domain. Our proof of the existence of types (computed by fixpoint of a typing operator) does not rely on metric properties, but on the fact that the identity is the limit of a sequence of projection terms. This establishes a connection with the work of Pitts on relational properties of domains. This also suggests that ideals are better understood as closed sets of terms defined by orthogonality with respect to a set of contexts.
Logical StepIndexed Logical Relations
"... We show how to reason about “stepindexed ” logical relations in an abstract way, avoiding the tedious, errorprone, and proofobscuring stepindex arithmetic that seems superficially to be an essential element of the method. Specifically, we define a logic LSLR, which is inspired by Plotkin and Aba ..."
Abstract

Cited by 26 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We show how to reason about “stepindexed ” logical relations in an abstract way, avoiding the tedious, errorprone, and proofobscuring stepindex arithmetic that seems superficially to be an essential element of the method. Specifically, we define a logic LSLR, which is inspired by Plotkin and Abadi’s logic for parametricity, but also supports recursively defined relations by means of the modal “later ” operator from Appel et al.’s “very modal model” paper. We encode in LSLR a logical relation for reasoning (in)equationally about programs in callbyvalue System F extended with recursive types. Using this logical relation, we derive a useful set of rules with which we can prove contextual (in)equivalences without mentioning step indices. 1
Typed Compilation of Recursive Datatypes
 In ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Types in Language Design and Implementation (TLDI
, 2003
"... Standard ML employs an opaque (or generative) semantics of datatypes, in which every datatype declaration produces a new type that is different from any other type, including other identically defined datatypes. A natural way of accounting for this is to consider datatypes to be abstract. When this ..."
Abstract

Cited by 19 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Standard ML employs an opaque (or generative) semantics of datatypes, in which every datatype declaration produces a new type that is different from any other type, including other identically defined datatypes. A natural way of accounting for this is to consider datatypes to be abstract. When this interpretation is applied to typepreserving compilation, however, it has the unfortunate consequence that datatype constructors cannot be inlined, substantially increasing the runtime cost of constructor invocation compared to a traditional compiler. In this paper we examine two approaches to eliminating function call overhead from datatype constructors. First, we consider a transparent interpretation of datatypes that does away with generativity, altering the semantics of SML; and second, we propose an interpretation of datatype constructors as coercions, which have no runtime effect or cost and faithfully implement SML semantics.
Numbering matters: Firstorder canonical forms for secondorder recursive types
 In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP’04
, 2004
"... We study a type system equipped with universal types and equirecursive types, which we refer to as Fµ. We show that type equality may be decided in time O(n log n), an improvement over the previous known bound of O(n 2). In fact, we show that two more general problems, namely entailment of type equa ..."
Abstract

Cited by 15 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We study a type system equipped with universal types and equirecursive types, which we refer to as Fµ. We show that type equality may be decided in time O(n log n), an improvement over the previous known bound of O(n 2). In fact, we show that two more general problems, namely entailment of type equations and type unification, may be decided in time O(n log n), a new result. To achieve this bound, we associate, with every Fµ type, a firstorder canonical form, which may be computed in time O(n log n). By exploiting this notion, we reduce all three problems to equality and unification of firstorder recursive terms, for which efficient algorithms are known. 1