An official website of the United States government
Type systems typically only define the conditions under which an expression is well-typed, leaving ill-typed expressions formally meaningless. This approach is insufficient as the basis for language servers driving modern programming environments, which are expected to recover from simultaneously localized errors and continue to provide a variety of downstream semantic services. This paper addresses this problem, contributing the first comprehensive formal account of total type error localization and recovery: the marked lambda calculus. In particular, we define a gradual type system for expressions with marked errors, which operate as non-empty holes, together with a total procedure for marking arbitrary unmarked expressions. We mechanize the metatheory of the marked lambda calculus in Agda and implement it, scaled up, as the new basis for Hazel, a full-scale live functional programming environment with, uniquely, no meaningless editor states. The marked lambda calculus is bidirectionally typed, so localization decisions are systematically predictable based on a local flow of typing information. Constraint-based type inference can bring more distant information to bear in discovering inconsistencies but this notoriously complicates error localization. We approach this problem by deploying constraint solving as a type-hole-filling layer atop this gradual bidirectionally typed core. Errors arising from inconsistent unification constraints are localized exclusively to type and expression holes, i.e., the system identifies unfillable holes using a system of traced provenances, rather than localized in anad hocmanner to particular expressions. The user can then interactively shift these errors to particular downstream expressions by selecting from suggested partially consistent type hole fillings, which returns control back to the bidirectional system. We implement this type hole inference system in Hazel.
more »
« less
Live Pattern Matching with Typed Holes
Several modern programming systems, including GHC Haskell, Agda, Idris, and Hazel, supporttyped holes. Assigning static and, to varying degree, dynamic meaning to programs with holes allows program editors and other tools to offer meaningful feedback and assistance throughout editing, i.e. in alivemanner. Prior work, however, has considered only holes appearing in expressions and types. This paper considers, from type theoretic and logical first principles, the problem of typed pattern holes. We confront two main difficulties, (1) statically reasoning about exhaustiveness and irredundancy when patterns are not fully known, and (2) live evaluation of expressions containing both pattern and expression holes. In both cases, this requires reasoning conservatively about all possible hole fillings. We develop a typed lambda calculus, Peanut, where reasoning about exhaustiveness and redundancy is mapped to the problem of deriving first order entailments. We equip Peanut with an operational semantics in the style of Hazelnut Live that allows us to evaluate around holes in both expressions and patterns. We mechanize the metatheory of Peanut in Agda and formalize a procedure capable of deciding the necessary entailments. Finally, we scale up and implement these mechanisms within Hazel, a programming environment for a dialect of Elm that automatically inserts holes during editing to provide static and dynamic feedback to the programmer in a maximally live manner, i.e. for every possible editor state. Hazel is the first maximally live environment for a general-purpose functional language.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2238744
- PAR ID:
- 10603235
- Publisher / Repository:
- Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages
- Volume:
- 7
- Issue:
- OOPSLA1
- ISSN:
- 2475-1421
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 609-635
- Size(s):
- p. 609-635
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Live programming environments aim to provide programmers (and sometimes audiences) with continuous feedback about a program's dynamic behavior as it is being edited. The problem is that programming languages typically assign dynamic meaning only to programs that are complete, i.e. syntactically well-formed and free of type errors. Consequently, live feedback presented to the programmer exhibits temporal or perceptive gaps. This paper confronts this gap problem from type-theoretic first principles by developing a dynamic semantics for incomplete functional programs, starting from the static semantics for incomplete functional programs developed in recent work on Hazelnut. We model incomplete functional programs as expressions with holes, with empty holes standing for missing expressions or types, and non-empty holes operating as membranes around static and dynamic type inconsistencies. Rather than aborting when evaluation encounters any of these holes as in some existing systems, evaluation proceeds around holes, tracking the closure around each hole instance as it flows through the remainder of the program. Editor services can use the information in these hole closures to help the programmer develop and confirm their mental model of the behavior of the complete portions of the program as they decide how to fill the remaining holes. Hole closures also enable a fill-and-resume operation that avoids the need to restart evaluation after edits that amount to hole filling. Formally, the semantics borrows machinery from both gradual type theory (which supplies the basis for handling unfilled type holes) and contextual modal type theory (which supplies a logical basis for hole closures), combining these and developing additional machinery necessary to continue evaluation past holes while maintaining type safety. We have mechanized the metatheory of the core calculus, called Hazelnut Live, using the Agda proof assistant. We have also implemented these ideas into the Hazel programming environment. The implementation inserts holes automatically, following the Hazelnut edit action calculus, to guarantee that every editor state has some (possibly incomplete) type. Taken together with this paper's type safety property, the result is a proof-of-concept live programming environment where rich dynamic feedback is truly available without gaps, i.e. for every reachable editor state.more » « less
-
Abstract Gradual typing allows programs to enjoy the benefits of both static typing and dynamic typing. While it is often desirable to migrate a program from more dynamically typed to more statically typed or vice versa, gradual typing itself does not provide a way to facilitate this migration. This places the burden on programmers who have to manually add or remove type annotations. Besides the general challenge of adding type annotations to dynamically typed code, there are subtle interactions between these annotations in gradually typed code that exacerbate the situation. For example, to migrate a program to be as static as possible, in general, all possible combinations of adding or removing type annotations from parameters must be tried out and compared. In this paper, we address this problem by developing migrational typing , which efficiently types all possible ways of replacing dynamic types with fully static types for a gradually typed program. The typing result supports automatically migrating a program to be as static as possible or introducing the least number of dynamic types necessary to remove a type error. The approach can be extended to support user-defined criteria about which annotations to modify. We have implemented migrational typing and evaluated it on large programs. The results show that migrational typing scales linearly with the size of the program and takes only 2–4 times longer than plain gradual typing.more » « less
-
Version control systems typically rely on apatch language, heuristicpatch synthesis algorithmslike diff, andthree-way merge algorithms. Standard patch languages and merge algorithms often fail to identify conflicts correctly when there are multiple edits to one line of code or code is relocated. This paper introduces Grove, a collaborative structure editor calculus that eliminates patch synthesis and three-way merge algorithms entirely. Instead, patches are derived directly from the log of the developer’s edit actions and all edits commute, i.e. the repository state forms a commutative replicated data type (CmRDT). To handle conflicts that can arise due to code relocation, the core datatype in Grove is a labeled directed multi-graph with uniquely identified vertices and edges. All edits amount to edge insertion and deletion, with deletion being permanent. To support tree-based editing, we define a decomposition from graphs intogroves, which are a set of syntax trees with conflicts—including local, relocation, and unicyclic relocation conflicts—represented explicitly using holes and references between trees. Finally, we define a type error localization system for groves that enjoys atotalityproperty, i.e. all editor states in Grove are statically meaningful, so developers can use standard editor services while working to resolve these explicitly represented conflicts. The static semantics is defined as a bidirectional marking system in line with recent work, with gradual typing employed to handle situations where errors and conflicts prevent type determination. We then layer on a unification-based type inference system to opportunistically fill type holes and fail gracefully when no solution exists. We mechanize the metatheory of Grove using the Agda theorem prover. We implement these ideas as theGrove Workbench, which generates the necessary data structures and algorithms in OCaml given a syntax tree specification.more » « less
-
In gradual typing, different languages perform different dynamic type checks for the same program even though the languages have the same static type system. This raises the question of whether, given a gradually typed language, the combination of the translation that injects checks in well-typed terms and the dynamic semantics that determines their behavior sufficiently enforce the static type system of the language. Neither type soundness, nor complete monitoring, nor any other meta-theoretic property of gradually typed languages to date provides a satisfying answer. In response, we present vigilance, a semantic analytical instrument that defines when the check-injecting translation and dynamic semantics of a gradually typed language are adequate for its static type system. Technically, vigilance asks if a given translation-and-semantics combination enforces the complete run-time typing history of a value, which consists of all of the types associated with the value. We show that the standard combination for so-called Natural gradual typing is vigilant for the standard simple type system, but the standard combination for Transient gradual typing is not. At the same time, the standard combination for Transient is vigilant for a tag type system but the standard combination for Natural is not. Hence, we clarify the comparative type-level reasoning power between the two most studied approaches to sound gradual typing. Furthermore, as an exercise that demonstrates how vigilance can guide design, we introduce and examine a new theoretical static gradual type system, dubbed truer, that is stronger than tag typing and more faithfully reflects the type-level reasoning power that the dynamic semantics of Transient gradual typing can guarantee.more » « less
