Abstract. In previous work, the author gave a higher-order analysis of focusing proofs (in the sense of Andreoli’s search strategy), with a role for infinitary rules very similar in structure to Buchholz’s Ω-rule. Among other benefits, this “pattern-based ” description of focusing simplifies the cut-elimination procedure, allowing cuts to be eliminated in a connective-generic way. However, interpreted literally, it is problematic as a representation technique for proofs, because of the difficulty of inspecting and/or exhaustively searching over these infinite objects. In the spirit of infinitary proof theory, this paper explores a view of pattern-based focusing proofs as façons de parler, describing how to compile them down to first-order derivations through defunctionalization, Reynolds ’ program transformation. Our main result is a representation of pattern-based focusing in the Twelf logical framework, whose core type theory is too weak to directly encode infinitary rules—although this weakness directly enables so-called “higher-order abstract syntax ” encodings. By applying the systematic defunctionalization transform, not only do we retain the benefits of the higher-order focusing analysis, but we can also take advantage of HOAS within Twelf, ultimately arriving at a proof representation with surprisingly little bureaucracy. 1

Static type systems strive to be richly expressive while still being simple enough for programmers to use. We describe an experiment that enriches Haskell’s kind system with two features promoted from its type system: data types and polymorphism. The new system has a very good power-to-weight ratio: it offers a significant improvement in expressiveness, but, by re-using concepts that programmers are already familiar with, the system is easy to understand and implement. Categories and Subject Descriptors D.3.3 [Language Constructs and Features]: Data types and structures, Polymorphism; F.3.3 [Studies of Program Constructs]: Type structure

See next page for additional authors