suzanne.soy/trivial
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

[rebuttal] matthias edits

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Ben Greenman 2016-05-03 22:31:54 -04:00
parent 053c44aa78
commit ddf5a59948
1 changed files with 36 additions and 30 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

66
icfp-2016/rebuttal.txt
View File

@ -1,43 +1,49 @@
0. Thanks!
Thanks!
1. The purpose of this pearl is to describe a language-agnostic technique
for augmenting the rich "simple" type systems of functional languages
---via libraries that any programmer may implement and even prove correct.
1. The purpose of this pearl is to describe a language agnostic technique
for augmenting a traditional type checker.
2. Typed Racket serves as the vehicle for a sample implementation for a
range of concrete augmentations, because it allows us to fit the ENTIRE
CORE IMPLEMENTATION into the paper. We will supply the remaining few
bits. The existing page limits accommodate this addition; more than
suffices; we just thought they were too obvious.
[[The pearl also illustrates the power of Racket's macro expander once
again, but this has been shown many times before and is NOT the goal.]]
2. We use Typed Racket to illustrate the technique ONLY because the
choice allows us to fit the ENTIRE core implementation in Sections 5.1
and 5.2.
3. It is correct that neither our elaboration mechanism nor our examples in
Section 3 are new. That is precisely why this is a PEARL and NOT A
RESEARCH PAPER.
[[ Section 5 illustrates the power of Racket's macro expander,
but this has been shown many times before. ]]
Like any other functional pearl, ours demonstrates a novel combination
of old ideas with concise, elegant code (basically functional rewrite
rules on syntax).
* Any programmer can use our technique to implement a type system
extension as a library. (The Typed Racket implementation is
validation.)
3. It is correct that neither our elaboration mechanism nor our examples
in Section 3 are new. That is precisely why this is a PEARL.
* Our technique is compositional. All examples are local transformation
that structurally traverse arbitrarily deep expressions to synthesize
[check] types in a hierarchical manner.
Like a functional pearl written in any other language, our pearl demonstrates
a novel combination of old ideas with concise, elegant code.
* The guarantees for an augmented type system are as strong as a type
system designed in a holistic manner.
* Our technique can be implemented by language users i.e. as a library.
(The Typed Racket implementation is proof.)
The proof obligations for such basic guarantees are stated explicitly
in section 2.
* Our technique is compositional.
All examples are local transformations that work up to arbitrary
expression nesting and cooperate with definition forms.
* Our technique provides guarantees.
The basic guarantees and proof obligations necessary to obtain them
are explicitly stated in Section 2.
Specific guarantees like "the new division function raises compile-time
errors when called with a 0 denominators" are theorems that may be
stated and proved using a suitable dependent type system.
We chose our examples to suggest theorems that a user might want to prove
about their own implementation of the technique.
Specific guarantees like "the new division function raises
compile-time errors when called with a 0 denominators" are theorems
that may be stated and proven correct in the same was as Haskell's or
ML's type system is proven correct.
The examples are chosen precisely because they suggest theorems that a
programmer might wish to prove. Doing so is, however, beyond the scope
of a pearl that demonstrates how unusual but elegant functional code
can achieve this highly desirable goal.
================================================================================
=== END OF FORMAL RESPONSE. Detailed comments to reviewers (RA RB RC) follow.
@ -170,7 +176,7 @@
Besides removing casts, the library is also useful for early detection of
bugs when writing programs.
Our personal experience has been good and we are currently in the process
of soliciting feedback from Typed Racket users
of soliciting feedback from Typed Racket users
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------