Abstract

Programs are rarely implemented in a single language, and thus questions of type soundness should address not only the semantics of a single language, but how it interacts with others. Even between type-safe languages, disparate features frustrate interoperability, as invariants from one language can easily be violated in the other. In their seminal 2007 paper, Matthews and Findler proposed a multi-language construction that augments the interoperating languages with a pair of boundaries that allow code from one language to be embedded in the other. While the technique has been widely applied, their syntactic source-level interoperability doesn't reflect practical implementations, where behavior of interaction is defined after compilation to a common target, and any safety must be ensured by target invariants or inserted target-level "glue code." In this paper, we present a framework for the design and verification of sound language interoperability that follows an interoperation-after-compilation strategy. Language designers specify what data can be converted between types of the languages via a relation τA∼τBτ_A \sim τ_B and specify target glue code implementing conversions. Then, by giving a semantic model of source types as sets of target terms, we can establish soundness of conversions: i.e., whenever τA∼τBτ_A \sim τ_B, the corresponding pair of conversions convert target terms that behave as τAτ_A to target terms that behave as τBτ_B, and vice versa. We can then prove semantic type soundness for the entire system. We illustrate our framework via a series of case studies that demonstrate how our semantic interoperation-after-compilation approach allows us both to account for complex differences in language semantics and make efficiency trade-offs based on particularities of compilers or targets.

Explore this paper’s authors, topics and related work.

Building this map preview

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

Reviews 0

Write a reviewWrite

No reviews yet.

Discussion 0

Add a commentWrite

No comments yet.