Programming and reasoning with algebraic effects and dependent types

ABSTRACT

One often cited benefit of pure functional programming is that pure code is easier to test and reason about, both formally and informally. However, real programs have side-effects including state management, exceptions and interactions with the outside world. Haskell solves this problem using monads to capture details of possibly side-effecting computations --- it provides monads for capturing state, I/O, exceptions, non-determinism, libraries for practical purposes such as CGI and parsing, and many others, as well as monad transformers for combining multiple effects.

Unfortunately, useful as monads are, they do not compose very well. Monad transformers can quickly become unwieldy when there are lots of effects to manage, leading to a temptation in larger programs to combine everything into one coarse-grained state and exception monad. In this paper I describe an alternative approach based on handling algebraic effects, implemented in the IDRIS programming language. I show how to describe side effecting computations, how to write programs which compose multiple fine-grained effects, and how, using dependent types, we can use this approach to reason about states in effectful programs.

References

1. J. Aldrich, J. Sunshine, D. Saini, and Z. Sparks. Typestate-oriented programming. In Proceedings of the 24th conference on Object Oriented Programming Systems Languages and Applications, pages 1015--1012, 2009.
2. L. Augustsson and M. Carlsson. An exercise in dependent types: A well-typed interpreter, 1999. In Workshop on Dependent Types in Programming, Gothenburg.
3. A. Bauer and M. Pretnar. Programming with Algebraic Effects and Handlers, 2012. Available from http://arxiv.org/abs/1203. 1539.
4. E. Brady. Idris, a General Purpose Programming Language: Design and Implementation, 2013. Draft.
5. E. Brady. Programming in Idris: a Tutorial, 2013. Available from http://idris-lang.org/tutorial.
6. newblock {An exercise in dependent types: A well-typed interpreter}, 1999E. Brady and K. Hammond. A verified staged interpreter is a verified compiler. In Generative Programming and Component Engineering (GPCE 2006). ACM, 2006.
7. E. Brady and K. Hammond. Correct-by-construction concurrency: Using dependent types to verify implementations of effectful resource usage protocols. Fundamenta Informaticae, 102:145--176, 2010.
8. E. Brady and K. Hammond. Scrapping your inefficient engine: Using partial evaluation to improve domain-specific language implementation. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP '10), pages 297--308. ACM, 2010.
9. E. Brady and K. Hammond. Resource-safe Systems Programming with Embedded Domain Specific Languages. In Practical Applications of Declarative Languages, pages 242--257, 2012.
10. J. Carette, O. Kiselyov, and C.-C. Shan. Finally tagless, partially evaluated: Tagless staged interpreters for simpler typed languages. Journal of Functional Programming, 19(05):509--543.
11. D. Delahaye. A tactic language for the system Coq. In Logic for Programming and Automated Reasoning (LPAR), volume 1955 of LNAI, pages 85--95. Springer, 2000.
12. P. Hancock and A. Setzer. Interactive Programs in Dependent Type Theory. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference of the EACSL on Computer Science Logic, pages 317--331, Aug. 2000.
13. M. Hyland, G. Plotkin, and J. Power. Combining effects: Sum and tensor. Theoretical Computer Science, 357:70--99, 2006.
14. M. Jaskelioff. Modular monad transformers. In ESOP 09: Proceedings of the 18th European Symposium on Programming Languages and Systems, LNCS, pages 64--79. Springer, 2009.
15. O. Kammar, S. Lindley, and N. Oury. Handlers in action. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP '13). ACM, 2013.
16. P. B. Levy. Call-By-Push-Value. PhD thesis, Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of London, 2001.
17. S. Liang, P. Hudak, and M. Jones. Monad transformers and modular interpreters. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 333--343, New York, New York, USA, Jan. 1995. ACM Press.
18. B. Lippmeier. Witnessing Purity, Constancy and Mutability. In 7th Asian Symposium on Programming Languages and Systems (APLAS 2009), volume 5904 of LNCS, pages 95--110. Springer, 2009.
19. C. McBride. Kleisli arrows of outrageous fortune, 2011. Draft.
20. C. McBride and R. Paterson. Applicative programming with effects. Journal of functional programming, 18(1):1--13, 2008.
21. M. Michelbrink and A. Setzer. State dependent IO-monads in type theory. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, 122:127--146, 2005.
22. A. Nanevski, G. Morrisett, and L. Birkedal. Hoare type theory, polymorphism and separation. Journal of Functional Programming, 18(5--6):865--911, Sept. 2008.
23. A. Nanevski, G. Morrisett, A. Shinnar, P. Govereau, and L. Birkedal. Ynot: Dependent types for imperative programs. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP '08), pages 229--240. ACM, 2008.
24. M. Odersky, P. Altherr, V. Cremet, B. Emir, S. Maneth, S. Micheloud, N. Mihaylov, M. Schinz, E. Stenman, and M. Zenger. An overview of the Scala programming language. Technical report, 2004.
25. E. Pasalic, W. Taha, and T. Sheard. Tagless staged interpreters for typed languages. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP '02), volume 37, pages 218--229. ACM, Sept. 2002.
26. S. Peyton Jones. Haskell 98 Language and Libraries: The Revised Report. Technical report, 2002.
27. G. Plotkin and M. Pretnar. Handlers of Algebraic Effects. In ESOP 09: Proceedings of the 18th European Symposium on Programming Languages and Systems, pages 80--94, 2009.
28. M. Pretnar. The Logic and Handling of Algebraic Effects. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh, 2010.
29. R. Strom and S. Yemini. Typestate: A programming language concept for enhancing software reliability. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-12(1):157--171, 1986.
30. W. Swierstra. Data types a la carte. Journal of functional programming, 18(4):423--436, 2008.
31. P. Wadler. Monads for functional programming. In J. Jeuring and E. Meijer, editors, Advanced Functional Programming, volume 925 of LNCS, pages 24--52. Springer, 1995.
32. D. Walker. A Type System for Expressive Security Policies. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, POPL '00, pages 254--267. ACM, 2000.
33. H. Xi. Imperative Programming with Dependent Types. In 15th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 375--387, 2000.

Index Terms

• Software and its engineering

  • Software notations and tools

    • General programming languages

      • Language types

        • Functional languages