BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Jana Dunfield

Jana Dunfield contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Programming LanguagesLogic in Computer Science

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
6works
0followers
2topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

6 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Bidirectional Typing

Bidirectional typing combines two modes of typing: type checking, which checks that a program satisfies a known type, and type synthesis, which determines a type from the program. Using checking enables bidirectional typing to support features for which inference is undecidable; using synthesis enables bidirectional typing to avoid the large annotation burden of explicitly typed languages. In addition, bidirectional typing improves error locality. We highlight the design principles that underlie bidirectional type systems, survey the development of bidirectional typing from the prehistoric period before Pierce and Turner's local type inference to the present day, and provide guidance for future investigations.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Complete and Easy Bidirectional Typechecking for Higher-Rank Polymorphism

Bidirectional typechecking, in which terms either synthesize a type or are checked against a known type, has become popular for its scalability (unlike Damas-Milner type inference, bidirectional typing remains decidable even for very expressive type systems), its error reporting, and its relative ease of implementation. Following design principles from proof theory, bidirectional typing can be applied to many type constructs. The principles underlying a bidirectional approach to polymorphism, however, are less obvious. We give a declarative, bidirectional account of higher-rank polymorphism, grounded in proof theory; this calculus enjoys many properties such as eta-reduction and predictability of annotations. We give an algorithm for implementing the declarative system; our algorithm is remarkably simple and well-behaved, despite being both sound and complete.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Elaborating Evaluation-Order Polymorphism

We classify programming languages according to evaluation order: each language fixes one evaluation order as the default, making it transparent to program in that evaluation order, and troublesome to program in the other. This paper develops a type system that is impartial with respect to evaluation order. Evaluation order is implicit in terms, and explicit in types, with by-value and by-name versions of type connectives. A form of intersection type quantifies over evaluation orders, describing code that is agnostic over (that is, polymorphic in) evaluation order. By allowing such generic code, programs can express the by-value and by-name versions of a computation without code duplication. We also formulate a type system that only has by-value connectives, plus a type that generalizes the difference between by-value and by-name connectives: it is either a suspension (by name) or a "no-op" (by value). We show a straightforward encoding of the impartial type system into the more economical one. Then we define an elaboration from the economical language to a call-by-value semantics, and prove that elaborating a well-typed source program, where evaluation order is implicit, produces a well-typed target program where evaluation order is explicit. We also prove a simulation between evaluation of the target program and reductions (either by-value or by-name) in the source program. Finally, we prove that typing, elaboration, and evaluation are faithful to the type annotations given in the source program: if the programmer only writes by-value types, no by-name reductions can occur at run time.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Elaborating Intersection and Union Types

Designing and implementing typed programming languages is hard. Every new type system feature requires extending the metatheory and implementation, which are often complicated and fragile. To ease this process, we would like to provide general mechanisms that subsume many different features. In modern type systems, parametric polymorphism is fundamental, but intersection polymorphism has gained little traction in programming languages. Most practical intersection type systems have supported only refinement intersections, which increase the expressiveness of types (more precise properties can be checked) without altering the expressiveness of terms; refinement intersections can simply be erased during compilation. In contrast, unrestricted intersections increase the expressiveness of terms, and can be used to encode diverse language features, promising an economy of both theory and implementation. We describe a foundation for compiling unrestricted intersection and union types: an elaboration type system that generates ordinary lambda-calculus terms. The key feature is a Forsythe-like merge construct. With this construct, not all reductions of the source program preserve types; however, we prove that ordinary call-by-value evaluation of the elaborated program corresponds to a type-preserving evaluation of the source program. We also describe a prototype implementation and applications of unrestricted intersections and unions: records, operator overloading, and simulating dynamic typing.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Sound and Complete Bidirectional Typechecking for Higher-Rank Polymorphism with Existentials and Indexed Types

Bidirectional typechecking, in which terms either synthesize a type or are checked against a known type, has become popular for its applicability to a variety of type systems, its error reporting, and its ease of implementation. Following principles from proof theory, bidirectional typing can be applied to many type constructs. The principles underlying a bidirectional approach to indexed types (generalized algebraic datatypes) are less clear. Building on proof-theoretic treatments of equality, we give a declarative specification of typing based on focalization. This approach permits declarative rules for coverage of pattern matching, as well as support for first-class existential types using a focalized subtyping judgment. We use refinement types to avoid explicitly passing equality proofs in our term syntax, making our calculus similar to languages such as Haskell and OCaml. We also extend the declarative specification with an explicit rules for deducing when a type is principal, permitting us to give a complete declarative specification for a rich type system with significant type inference. We also give a set of algorithmic typing rules, and prove that it is sound and complete with respect to the declarative system. The proof requires a number of technical innovations, including proving soundness and completeness in a mutually recursive fashion.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Sums of Uncertainty: Refinements Go Gradual

A long-standing shortcoming of statically typed functional languages is that type checking does not rule out pattern-matching failures (run-time match exceptions). Refinement types distinguish different values of datatypes; if a program annotated with refinements passes type checking, pattern-matching failures become impossible. Unfortunately, refinement is a monolithic property of a type, exacerbating the difficulty of adding refinement types to nontrivial programs. Gradual typing has explored how to incrementally move between static typing and dynamic typing. We develop a type system of gradual sums that combines refinement with imprecision. Then, we develop a bidirectional version of the type system, which rules out excessive imprecision, and give a type-directed translation to a target language with explicit casts. We prove that the static sublanguage cannot have match failures, that a well-typed program remains well-typed if its type annotations are made less precise, and that making annotations less precise causes target programs to fail later. Several of these results correspond to criteria for gradual typing given by Siek et al. (2015).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access