Annotated Type Systems for Program Analysis

Abstract

<p>In this Ph.D. thesis, we study four program analyses. Three of them are specified by annotated type systems and the last one by abstract interpretation.</p><p>We present a combined strictness and totality analysis. We are specifying the analysis as an annotated type system. The type system allows conjunctions of annotated types, but only at the top-level. The analysis is somewhat more powerful than the strictness analysis by Kuo and Mishra due to the conjunctions and in that we also consider totality. The analysis is shown sound with respect to a natural-style operational semantics. The analysis is not immediately extendable to full conjunction.</p><p>The second analysis is also a combined strictness and totality analysis, however with ``full´´ conjunction. Soundness of the analysis is shown with respect to a denotational semantics. The analysis is more powerful than the strictness analyses by Jensen and Benton in that it in addition to strictness considers totality. So far we have only specified the analyses, however in order for the analyses to be practically useful we need an algorithm for inferring the annotated types. We construct an algorithm for the second analysis using the lazy type approach by Hankin and Le Métayer. The reason for choosing the second analysis from the thesis is that the approach is not applicable to the first analysis.</p><p>The third analysis we study is a binding time analysis. We take the analysis specified by Nielson and Nielson and we construct a more efficient algorithm than the one proposed by Nielson and Nielson. The algorithm collects constraints in a structural manner like the type inference algorithm by Damas. Afterwards the minimal solution to the set of constraints is found.</p><p>The last analysis in the thesis is specified by abstract interpretation. Hunt shows that projection based analyses are subsumed by PER (partial equivalence relation) based analyses using abstract interpretation. The PERs used by Hunt are strict, i.e. bottom is related to bottom. Here we lift this restriction by requiring the PERs to be uniform, in the sense that they treat all the integers equally. By allowing non-strict PERs we get three properties on the integers, corresponding to the three annotations used in the first and second analysis in the thesis.</p>