Abstract

The Hindley/Milner polymorphic type system has been adopted in many programming languages because it provides the convenience of programming languages like Lisp along with the correctness guarantees that come with static type-checking. However, programming environments for such languages are still not as flexible as those for Lisp. In particular, the style of incremental, top-down program development possible in Lisp is precluded because the type inference system is usually formulated as a "batch system" that must examine definitions before their uses. This may require large parts of the program to be recompiled when a small editing change is performed. In this paper, we attempt to strike a balance between the apparently conflicting goals of incremental, top-down programming flexibility and static type-checking. We present an incremental typing mechanism in which top-level phrases can be compiled one by one, in any order, and repeatedly (due to editing). We show that the incremental ty...

Citations