Paper detail

Modular Inference of Linear Types for Multiplicity-Annotated Arrows

Bernardy et al. [2018] proposed a linear type system $λ^q_\to$ as a core type system of Linear Haskell. In the system, linearity is represented by annotated arrow types $A \to_m B$, where $m$ denotes the multiplicity of the argument. Thanks to this representation, existing non-linear code typechecks as it is, and newly written linear code can be used with existing non-linear code in many cases. However, little is known about the type inference of $λ^q_\to$. Although the Linear Haskell implementation is equipped with type inference, its algorithm has not been formalized, and the implementation often fails to infer principal types, especially for higher-order functions. In this paper, based on OutsideIn(X) [Vytiniotis et al., 2011], we propose an inference system for a rank 1 qualified-typed variant of $λ^q_\to$, which infers principal types. A technical challenge in this new setting is to deal with ambiguous types inferred by naive qualified typing. We address this ambiguity issue through quantifier elimination and demonstrate the effectiveness of the approach with examples.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.