Abstract. The paper “Scrap your boilerplate ” (SYB) introduces a combinator library for generic programming that offers generic traversals and queries. Classically, support for generic programming consists of two essential ingredients: a way to write (type-)overloaded functions, and independently, a way to access the structure of data types. SYB seems to lack the second. As a consequence, it is difficult to compare with other approaches such as PolyP or Generic Haskell. In this paper we reveal the structural view that SYB builds upon. This allows us to define the combinators as generic functions in the classical sense. We explain the SYB approach in this changed setting from ground up, and use the understanding gained to relate it to other generic programming approaches. Furthermore, we show that the SYB view is applicable to a very large class of data types, including generalized algebraic data types. 1

Abstract not found

Datatype-generic programming is defining functions that depend on the structure, or “shape”, of datatypes. It has been around for more than 10 years, and a lot of progress has been made, in particular in the lazy functional programming language Haskell. There are more than 10 proposals for generic programming libraries or language extensions for Haskell. To compare and characterize the many generic programming libraries in a typed functional language, we introduce a set of criteria and develop a generic programming benchmark: a set of characteristic examples testing various facets of datatype-generic programming. We have implemented the benchmark for nine existing Haskell generic programming libraries and present the evaluation of the libraries. The comparison is useful for reaching a common standard for generic programming, but also for a programmer who has to choose a particular approach for datatype-generic programming.

Abstract. The last decade has seen a number of approaches to datatype-generic programming: PolyP, Functorial ML, ‘Scrap Your Boilerplate’, Generic Haskell, ‘Generics for the Masses’, etc. The approaches vary in sophistication and target audience: some propose full-blown programming languages, some suggest libraries, some can be seen as categorical programming methods. In these lecture notes we compare the various approaches to datatype-generic programming in Haskell. We introduce each approach by means of example, and we evaluate it along different dimensions (expressivity, ease of use, etc). 1

We present a closed dependent type theory whose inductive types are given not by a scheme for generative declarations, but by encoding in a universe. Each inductive datatype arises by interpreting its description—a first-class value in a datatype of descriptions. Moreover, the latter itself has a description. Datatype-generic programming thus becomes ordinary programming. We show some of the resulting generic operations and deploy them in particular, useful ways on the datatype of datatype descriptions itself. Surprisingly this apparently self-supporting setup is achievable without paradox or infinite regress. 1.

www.cs.uu.nl

We show how the binary encoding and decoding of typed data and typed programs can be understood, programmed, and verified with the help of question-answer games. The encoding of a value is determined by the yes/no answers to a sequence of questions about that value; conversely, decoding is the interpretation of binary data as answers to the same question scheme. We introduce a general framework for writing and verifying gamebased codecs. We present games for structured, recursive, polymorphic, and indexed types, building up to a representation of well-typed terms in the simply-typed λ-calculus. The framework makes novel use of isomorphisms between types in the definition of games. The definition of isomorphisms together with additional simple properties make it easy to prove that codecs derived from games never encode two distinct values using the same code, never decode two codes to the same value, and interpret any bit sequence as a valid code for a value or as a prefix of a valid code.

Polytypic programming and data abstraction are important concepts in designing functional programs, but they do not fit well together. Polytypic programming currently depends on making public a free data type representation, while data abstraction depends on hiding the representation. This paper proposes the bialgebra views mechanism as a means of reconciling this conflict. Bialgebra views enable the specification of type structure according to interfaces, not representations, thus combining the genericity of polytypic programming with the information hiding of data abstraction, and narrowing the gap between generic programming in the functional and object-oriented paradigms. Categories and Subject Descriptors D.1.1 [Language Classifications]:

Abstract. These lecture notes introduce libraries for datatype-generic programming in Haskell. We introduce three characteristic generic programming libraries: lightweight implementation of generics and dynamics, extensible and modular generics for the masses, and scrap your boilerplate. We show how to use them to use and write generic programs. In the case studies for the different libraries we introduce generic components of a medium-sized application which assists a student in solving mathematical exercises. 1

Datatype-generic programming is about defining functions that depend on the structure, or “shape”, of datatypes. It has been around for more than 10 years, and a lot of progress has been made, in particular in the lazy functional programming language Haskell. There are more than 10 proposals for generic programming libraries or language extensions for Haskell. In this paper we compare and characterise the many generic programming libraries for Haskell. To that end, we introduce a set of criteria and develop a generic programming benchmark: a set of characteristic examples testing various facets of datatype-generic programming. We have implemented the benchmark for ten existing Haskell generic programming libraries and present the evaluation of the libraries. The comparison is useful for reaching a common standard for generic programming, but also for a programmer who has to choose a particular approach for datatype-generic programming.