skip to main content
research-article
Open Access

A unified view of modalities in type systems

Published:03 August 2020Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We propose to unify the treatment of a broad range of modalities in typed lambda calculi. We do so by defining a generic structure of modalities, and show that this structure arises naturally from the structure of intuitionistic logic, and as such finds instances in a wide range of type systems previously described in literature. Despite this generality, this structure has a rich metatheory, which we expose.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

a90-abel-presentation.mp4

mp4

66.6 MB

References

  1. Martín Abadi, Anindya Banerjee, Nevin Heintze, and Jon G. Riecke. 1999. A Core Calculus of Dependency. In POPL '99, Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, San Antonio, TX, USA, January 20-22, 1999, Andrew W. Appel and Alex Aiken (Eds.). ACM Press, 147-160. https://doi.org/10.1145/292540.292555 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Maximilian Algehed. 2018. A Perspective on the Dependency Core Calculus. In Proceedings of the 13th Workshop on Programming Languages and Analysis for Security, PLAS@CCS 2018, Toronto, ON, Canada, October 15-19, 2018. 24-28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3264820.3264823 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Maximilian Algehed and Jean-Philippe Bernardy. 2019. Simple noninterference from parametricity. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages 3, ICFP ( 2019 ), 89 : 1-89 : 22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341693 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Maximilian Algehed, Alejandro Russo, and Cormac Flanagan. 2019. Optimising Faceted Secure Multi-Execution. In 32nd IEEE Computer Security Foundations Symposium, CSF 2019, Hoboken, NJ, USA, June 25-28, 2019. 1-16. https: //doi.org/10.1109/CSF. 2019.00008 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Guillaume Allais, Robert Atkey, James Chapman, Conor McBride, and James McKinna. 2018. A type and scope safe universe of syntaxes with binding: their semantics and proofs. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages 2, ICFP ( 2018 ), 90 : 1-90 : 30. https://doi.org/10.1145/3236785 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Robert Atkey. 2018. The Syntax and Semantics of Quantitative Type Theory. In 33rd Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, LICS 2018, Oxford, UK, July 9-12, 2018, Anuj Dawar and Erich Grädel (Eds.). ACM Press, 56-65. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209108.3209189 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Robert Atkey and James Wood. 2018. Context constrained computation. In Third Workshop on Type-Driven Development (TyDe'18). https://personal.cis.strath.ac.uk/james.wood.100/pub/context-constrained.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Robert Atkey and James Wood. 2019. Linear metatheory via linear algebra. In 25th International Conference on Types for Proofs and Programs, TYPES 2019, Oslo, Norway, June 11-14, 2019, Book of Abstracts, Marc Bezem (Ed.). http://www.ii.uib.no/~bezem/program.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Hendrik Pieter Barendregt. 1992. Lambda calculi with types. Handbook of logic in computer science 2 ( 1992 ), 117-309. https://doi.org/10.1.1.26.4391Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Nick Benton, Chung-Kil Hur, Andrew Kennedy, and Conor McBride. 2012. Strongly Typed Term Representations in Coq. Journal of Automated Reasoning 49, 2 ( 2012 ), 141-159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-011-9219-0 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Jean-Philippe Bernardy, Mathieu Boespflug, Ryan R. Newton, Simon Peyton Jones, and Arnaud Spiwack. 2018. Linear Haskell: practical linearity in a higher-order polymorphic language. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages 2, POPL ( 2018 ), 5 : 1-5 : 29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3158093 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Corrado Böhm and Alessandro Berarducci. 1985. Automatic Synthesis of Typed Lambda-Programs on Term Algebras. Theoretical Computer Science 39 ( 1985 ), 135-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/ 0304-3975 ( 85 ) 90135-5 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. William J. Bowman and Amal Ahmed. 2015. Noninterference for free. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming, ICFP 2015, Vancouver, BC, Canada, September 1-3, 2015, Kathleen Fisher and John H. Reppy (Eds.). ACM Press, 101-113. https://doi.org/10.1145/2784731.2784733 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Aloïs Brunel, Marco Gaboardi, Damiano Mazza, and Steve Zdancewic. 2014. A Core Quantitative Coefect Calculus, See [Shao 2014 ], 351-370. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54833-8_19 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Hamid Ebadi, David Sands, and Gerardo Schneider. 2015. Diferential Privacy: Now it's Getting Personal. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, POPL 2015, Mumbai, India, January 15-17, 2015. 69-81. https://doi.org/10.1145/2676726.2677005 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Marco Gaboardi, Andreas Haeberlen, Justin Hsu, Arjun Narayan, and Benjamin C. Pierce. 2013. Linear dependent types for diferential privacy. In The 40th Annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, POPL '13, Rome, Italy-January 23-25, 2013. 357-370. https://doi.org/10.1145/2429069.2429113 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Marco Gaboardi, Shin-ya Katsumata, Dominic A. Orchard, Flavien Breuvart, and Tarmo Uustalu. 2016. Combining efects and coefects via grading. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming, ICFP 2016, Nara, Japan, September 18-22, 2016, Jacques Garrigue, Gabriele Keller, and Eijiro Sumii (Eds.). ACM, 476-489. https://doi.org/10.1145/2951913.2951939 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Dan R. Ghica and Alex I. Smith. 2014. Bounded Linear Types in a Resource Semiring, See [Shao 2014 ], 331-350. https: //doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54833-8_18 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Jean-Yves Girard. 1987. Linear Logic. Theoretical Computer Science 50 ( 1987 ), 1-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/ 0304-3975 ( 87 ) 90045-4 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Jean-Yves Girard, Andre Scedrov, and Philip J. Scott. 1992. Bounded linear logic: a modular approach to polynomial-time computability. Theoretical Computer Science 97, 1 ( 1992 ), 1-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/ 0304-3975 ( 92 ) 90386-T Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Ryu Hasegawa. 1994. Categorical Data Types in Parametric Polymorphism. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 4, 1 ( 1994 ), 71-109. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0960129500000372 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. G. A. Kavvos. 2019. Modalities, cohesion, and information flow. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages 3, POPL ( 2019 ), 20 : 1-20 : 29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290333 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Ugo Dal Lago and Martin Hofmann. 2009. Bounded Linear Logic, Revisited. In Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications, 9th International Conference, TLCA 2009, Brasilia, Brazil, July 1-3, 2009, Proceedings (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Pierre-Louis Curien (Ed.), Vol. 5608. Springer, 80-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02273-9_8 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Joachim Lambek. 1958. The mathematics of sentence structure. Amer. Math. Monthly 65, 3 ( 1958 ), 154-170. https: //doi.org/10.1080/00029890. 1958.11989160 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. John Launchbury. 1993. A Natural Semantics for Lazy Evaluation. In POPL. 144-154.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Conor McBride. 2016. I Got Plenty o' Nuttin'. In A List of Successes That Can Change the World-Essays Dedicated to Philip Wadler on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Sam Lindley, Conor McBride, Philip W. Trinder, and Donald Sannella (Eds.), Vol. 9600. Springer, 207-233. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30936-1_12 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Tom Murphy, Karl Crary, and Robert Harper. 2005. Distributed Control Flow with Classical Modal Logic. In Computer Science Logic, 19th International Workshop, CSL 2005, 14th Annual Conference of the EACSL, Oxford, UK, August 22-25, 2005, Proceedings. 51-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/11538363_6 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Dominic Orchard, Vilem-Benjamin Liepelt, and Harley Eades III. 2019. Quantitative program reasoning with graded modal types. PACMPL 3, ICFP ( 2019 ), 110 : 1-110 : 30. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341714 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Tomas Petricek, Dominic A. Orchard, and Alan Mycroft. 2014. Coefects: a calculus of context-dependent computation. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGPLAN international conference on Functional programming, Gothenburg, Sweden, September 1-3, 2014. 123-135. https://doi.org/10.1145/2628136.2628160 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Frank Pfenning. 2001. Intensionality, Extensionality, and Proof Irrelevance in Modal Type Theory. IEEE Computer Society Press, 221-230. https://doi.org/10.1109/LICS. 2001.932499 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Frank Pfenning and Rowan Davies. 2001. A judgmental reconstruction of modal logic. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 11, 4 ( 2001 ), 511-540. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0960129501003322 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Jef Polakow and Frank Pfenning. 1999. Natural Deduction for Intuitionistic Non-communicative Linear Logic. In Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications, 4th International Conference, TLCA'99, L 'Aquila, Italy, April 7-9, 1999, Proceedings (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Jean-Yves Girard (Ed.), Vol. 1581. Springer, 295-309. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48959-2_21 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Jason Reed and Benjamin C. Pierce. 2010. Distance makes the types grow stronger: a calculus for diferential privacy. In Proceeding of the 15th ACM SIGPLAN international conference on Functional programming, ICFP 2010, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, September 27-29, 2010, Paul Hudak and Stephanie Weirich (Eds.). ACM Press, 157-168. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 1863543.1863568 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. John C. Reynolds. 1983. Types, Abstraction and Parametric Polymorphism. In Information Processing 83, Proceedings of the IFIP 9th World Computer Congress, Paris, France, September 19-23, 1983, R. E. A. Mason (Ed.). North-Holland/IFIP, 513-523.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhong Shao (Ed.). 2014. Programming Languages and Systems-23rd European Symposium on Programming, ESOP 2014, Held as Part of the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software, ETAPS 2014, Grenoble, France, April 5-13, 2014, Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8410. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54833-8 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Stephen Tse and Steve Zdancewic. 2004. Translating dependency into parametricity. In Proceedings of the Ninth ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming, ICFP 2004, Snow Bird, UT, USA, September 19-21, 2004, Chris Okasaki and Kathleen Fisher (Eds.). ACM Press, 115-125. https://doi.org/10.1145/1016850.1016868 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Philip Wadler. 1989. Theorems for Free!. In Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Functional programming languages and computer architecture, FPCA 1989, London, UK, September 11-13, 1989, Joseph E. Stoy (Ed.). ACM Press, 347-359. https://doi.org/10.1145/99370.99404 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. David Walker. 2005. Substructural Type Systems. In Advanced Topics in Types and Programming Languages, Benjamin C. Pierce (Ed.). MIT Press, Chapter 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. A unified view of modalities in type systems

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in

          Full Access

          • Published in

            cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages
            Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages  Volume 4, Issue ICFP
            August 2020
            1070 pages
            EISSN:2475-1421
            DOI:10.1145/3415018
            Issue’s Table of Contents

            Copyright © 2020 Owner/Author

            This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 3 August 2020
            Published in pacmpl Volume 4, Issue ICFP

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader