research-article

Bounded refinement types

Authors:

Alexander Bakst,

Ranjit JhalaAuthors Info & Claims

ACM SIGPLAN Notices, Volume 50, Issue 9

Pages 48 - 61

https://doi.org/10.1145/2858949.2784745

Published: 29 August 2015 Publication History

Abstract

We present a notion of bounded quantification for refinement types and show how it expands the expressiveness of refinement typing by using it to develop typed combinators for: (1) relational algebra and safe database access, (2) Floyd-Hoare logic within a state transformer monad equipped with combinators for branching and looping, and (3) using the above to implement a refined IO monad that tracks capabilities and resource usage. This leap in expressiveness comes via a translation to ``ghost" functions, which lets us retain the automated and decidable SMT based checking and inference that makes refinement typing effective in practice.

References

[1]

C. Barrett, A. Stump, and C. Tinelli. http://smt-lib.org.

[2]

J. Bengtson, K. Bhargavan, C. Fournet, A. D. Gordon, and S. Maffeis. Refinement types for secure implementations. ACM TOPLAS, 2011.

Digital Library

[3]

Y. Bertot and P. Castéran. Coq’Art: The Calculus of Inductive Constructions. Springer Verlag, 2004.

Digital Library

[4]

R.L. Constable. Implementing Mathematics with the Nuprl Proof Development System. Prentice-Hall, 1986.

Digital Library

[5]

P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Abstract interpretation: a unified lattice model for the static analysis of programs. In POPL, 1977.

Digital Library

[6]

J. Dunfield. Refined typechecking with Stardust. In PLPV, 2007.

Digital Library

[7]

R. A. Eisenberg and S. Weirich. Dependently typed programming with singletons. In Haskell, 2012.

Digital Library

[8]

J.C. Filliˆatre. Proof of imperative programs in type theory. In TYPES, 1998.

[9]

C. Fournet, M. Kohlweiss, and P-Y. Strub. Modular code-based cryptographic verification. In CCS, 2011.

Digital Library

[10]

A. Guha, M. Fredrikson, B. Livshits, and N. Swamy. Verified security for browser extensions. In IEEE S & P, 2011.

Digital Library

[11]

G. Kaki and S. Jagannathan. A relational framework for higher-order shape analysis. In ICFP, 2014.

Digital Library

[12]

O. Kiselyov, R. Lämmel, and K. Schupke. Strongly typed heterogeneous collections. In Haskell, 2004.

Digital Library

[13]

D. Leijen and E. Meijer. Domain specific embedded compilers. In DSL, 1999.

Digital Library

[14]

C. McBride. Simulating dependent types in Haskell. In JFP, 2002.

Digital Library

[15]

S. Moore, C. Dimoulas, D. King, and S. Chong. SHILL: A secure shell scripting language. In OSDI, 2014.

Digital Library

[16]

A. Nanevski, G. Morrisett, A. Shinnar, P. Govereau, and L. Birkedal. Ynot: Dependent types for imperative programs. In ICFP, 2008.

Digital Library

[17]

G. Nelson. Techniques for program verification. Technical Report CSL81-10, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, 1981.

[18]

U. Norell. Towards a practical programming language based on dependent type theory. PhD thesis, Chalmers, 2007.

[19]

N. Oury and W. Swierstra. The power of Pi. In ICFP, 2008.

Digital Library

[20]

S. L. Peyton-Jones, D. Vytiniotis, S. Weirich, and G. Washburn. Simple unification-based type inference for GADTs. In ICFP, 2006.

Digital Library

[21]

P. Rondon, M. Kawaguchi, and R. Jhala. Liquid types. In PLDI, 2008.

Digital Library

[22]

J. Rushby, S. Owre, and N. Shankar. Subtypes for specifications: Predicate subtyping in pvs. IEEE TSE, 1998.

Digital Library

[23]

N. Swamy, J. Weinberger, C. Schlesinger, J. Chen, and B. Livshits. Verifying higher-order programs with the dijkstra monad. In PLDI, 2013.

Digital Library

[24]

UCSD Programming Systems. github.com/ucsd-progsys/ liquidhaskell/tree/master/benchmarks/icfp15.

[25]

S. Tobin-Hochstadt and M. Felleisen. Logical types for untyped languages. In ICFP, 2010.

Digital Library

[26]

H. Unno, T. Terauchi, and N. Kobayashi. Relatively complete verification of higher-order functional programs. In POPL, 2013.

Digital Library

[27]

N. Vazou, P. Rondon, and R. Jhala. Abstract refinement types. In ESOP, 2013.

Digital Library

[28]

N. Vazou, E. L. Seidel, and R. Jhala. Liquidhaskell: Experience with refinement types in the real world. In Haskell, 2014.

Digital Library

[29]

N. Vazou, E. L. Seidel, R. Jhala, D. Vytiniotis, and S. L. Peyton Jones. Refinement types for Haskell. In ICFP, 2014.

Digital Library

[30]

H. Xi and F. Pfenning. Eliminating array bound checking through dependent types. In PLDI, 1998.

Digital Library

Cited By

Ong CRamsay S(2017)Proceedings of the First Workshop on Coalgebra, Horn Clause Logic Programming and TypesElectronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science10.4204/EPTCS.258.7258(72-73)Online publication date: 13-Sep-2017
https://doi.org/10.4204/EPTCS.258.7
Ramsay SWalpole C(2024)Ill-Typed Programs Don’t EvaluateProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/36329098:POPL(2010-2040)Online publication date: 5-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632909
Jochems JJones ERamsay S(2023)Higher-Order MSL Horn ConstraintsProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/35712627:POPL(2017-2047)Online publication date: 11-Jan-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3571262
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Refinement types for Haskell
PLPV '14: Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2014 Workshop on Programming Languages meets Program Verification

We present LiquidHaskell (http://goto.ucsd.edu/liquid), an automatic verifier for Haskell. LiquidHaskell uses Refinement types, a restricted form of dependent types where relationships between values are encoded by decorating types with logical ...
Bounded refinement types
ICFP 2015: Proceedings of the 20th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming

We present a notion of bounded quantification for refinement types and show how it expands the expressiveness of refinement typing by using it to develop typed combinators for: (1) relational algebra and safe database access, (2) Floyd-Hoare logic ...
Gradual refinement types
POPL '17

Refinement types are an effective language-based verification technique. However, as any expressive typing discipline, its strength is its weakness, imposing sometimes undesired rigidity. Guided by abstract interpretation, we extend the gradual typing ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM SIGPLAN Notices

ACM SIGPLAN Notices Volume 50, Issue 9

ICFP '15

September 2015

436 pages

ISSN:0362-1340

EISSN:1558-1160

DOI:10.1145/2858949

Editor:
Andy Gill
University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS

Issue’s Table of Contents

ICFP 2015: Proceedings of the 20th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming
August 2015
436 pages
ISBN:9781450336697
DOI:10.1145/2784731
General Chair:
Kathleen Fisher
Tufts University, USA
,
Program Chair:
John Reppy
University of Chicago, USA

Copyright © 2015 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 29 August 2015

Published in SIGPLAN Volume 50, Issue 9

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

20
Total Citations
View Citations
366
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)25
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 13 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Ong CRamsay S(2017)Proceedings of the First Workshop on Coalgebra, Horn Clause Logic Programming and TypesElectronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science10.4204/EPTCS.258.7258(72-73)Online publication date: 13-Sep-2017
https://doi.org/10.4204/EPTCS.258.7
Ramsay SWalpole C(2024)Ill-Typed Programs Don’t EvaluateProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/36329098:POPL(2010-2040)Online publication date: 5-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632909
Jochems JJones ERamsay S(2023)Higher-Order MSL Horn ConstraintsProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/35712627:POPL(2017-2047)Online publication date: 11-Jan-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3571262
Jhala R(2022)Embedded Domain Specific VerifiersPrinciples of Systems Design10.1007/978-3-031-22337-2_26(535-553)Online publication date: 29-Dec-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22337-2_26
Jones ERamsay S(2021)Intensional datatype refinement: with application to scalable verification of pattern-match safetyProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/34343365:POPL(1-29)Online publication date: 4-Jan-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3434336
Pavlinovic ZSu YWies T(2021)Data flow refinement type inferenceProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/34343005:POPL(1-31)Online publication date: 4-Jan-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3434300
Haudebourg TGenet TJensen T(2020)Regular language type inference with term rewritingProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/34089944:ICFP(1-29)Online publication date: 3-Aug-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3408994
Montenegro MNieva SPeña RSegura C(2020)Extending Liquid Types to ArraysACM Transactions on Computational Logic10.1145/336274021:2(1-41)Online publication date: 21-Jan-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3362740
Gordon CBergenti FCastegren EDe Koster JFranco J(2019)Modal assertions for actor correctnessProceedings of the 9th ACM SIGPLAN International Workshop on Programming Based on Actors, Agents, and Decentralized Control10.1145/3358499.3361221(11-20)Online publication date: 22-Oct-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3358499.3361221
Qiu XWang Y(2019)A Decidable Logic for Tree Data-Structures with MeasurementsVerification, Model Checking, and Abstract Interpretation10.1007/978-3-030-11245-5_15(318-341)Online publication date: 11-Jan-2019
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11245-5_15
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

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

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents