Capture-avoiding Substitution Research Articles

Formal metatheory of second-order abstract syntax

Despite extensive research both on the theoretical and practical fronts, formalising, reasoning about, and implementing languages with variable binding is still a daunting endeavour – repetitive boilerplate and the overly complicated metatheory of capture-avoiding substitution often get in the way of progressing on to the actually interesting properties of a language. Existing developments offer some relief, however at the expense of inconvenient and error-prone term encodings and lack of formal foundations. We present a mathematically-inspired language-formalisation framework implemented in Agda. The system translates the description of a syntax signature with variable-binding operators into an intrinsically-encoded, inductive data type equipped with syntactic operations such as weakening and substitution, along with their correctness properties. The generated metatheory further incorporates metavariables and their associated operation of metasubstitution, which enables second-order equational/rewriting reasoning. The underlying mathematical foundation of the framework – initial algebra semantics – derives compositional interpretations of languages into their models satisfying the semantic substitution lemma by construction.

A type- and scope-safe universe of syntaxes with binding: their semantics and proofs

Abstract The syntax of almost every programming language includes a notion of binder and corresponding bound occurrences, along with the accompanying notions of α-equivalence, capture-avoiding substitution, typing contexts, runtime environments, and so on. In the past, implementing and reasoning about programming languages required careful handling to maintain the correct behaviour of bound variables. Modern programming languages include features that enable constraints like scope safety to be expressed in types. Nevertheless, the programmer is still forced to write the same boilerplate over again for each new implementation of a scope-safe operation (e.g., renaming, substitution, desugaring, printing), and then again for correctness proofs. We present an expressive universe of syntaxes with binding and demonstrate how to (1) implement scope-safe traversals once and for all by generic programming; and (2) how to derive properties of these traversals by generic proving. Our universe description, generic traversals and proofs, and our examples have all been formalised in Agda and are available in the accompanying material available online at https://github.com/gallais/generic-syntax.

Bindings as bounded natural functors

We present a general framework for specifying and reasoning about syntax with bindings. Abstract binder types are modeled using a universe of functors on sets, subject to a number of operations that can be used to construct complex binding patterns and binding-aware datatypes, including non-well-founded and infinitely branching types, in a modular fashion. Despite not committing to any syntactic format, the framework is ``concrete'' enough to provide definitions of the fundamental operators on terms (free variables, alpha-equivalence, and capture-avoiding substitution) and reasoning and definition principles. This work is compatible with classical higher-order logic and has been formalized in the proof assistant Isabelle/HOL.

Towards the Essence of Hygiene

Hygiene is an essential aspect of Scheme's macro system that prevents unintended variable capture. However, previous work on hygiene has focused on algorithmic implementation rather than precise, mathematical definition of what constitutes hygiene. This is in stark contrast with lexical scope, alpha-equivalence and capture-avoiding substitution, which also deal with preventing unintended variable capture but have widely applicable and well-understood mathematical definitions. This paper presents such a precise, mathematical definition of hygiene. It reviews various kinds of hygiene violation and presents examples of how they occur. From these examples, we develop a practical algorithm for hygienic macro expansion. We then present algorithm-independent, mathematical criteria for whether a macro expansion algorithm is hygienic. This characterization corresponds closely to existing hygiene algorithms and sheds light on aspects of hygiene that are usually overlooked in informal definitions.

Binders unbound

Implementors of compilers, program refactorers, theorem provers, proof checkers, and other systems that manipulate syntax know that dealing with name binding is difficult to do well. Operations such as α-equivalence and capture-avoiding substitution seem simple, yet subtle bugs often go undetected. Furthermore, their implementations are tedious, requiring "boilerplate" code that must be updated whenever the object language definition changes. Many researchers have therefore sought to specify binding syntax declaratively, so that tools can correctly handle the details behind the scenes. This idea has been the inspiration for many new systems (such as Beluga, Delphin, FreshML, FreshOCaml, Cαml, FreshLib, and Ott) but there is still room for improvement in expressivity, simplicity and convenience. In this paper, we present a new domain-specific language, Unbound , for specifying binding structure. Our language is particularly expressive - it supports multiple atom types, pattern binders, type annotations, recursive binders, and nested binding (necessary for telescopes, a feature found in dependently-typed languages). However, our specification language is also simple, consisting of just five basic combinators. We provide a formal semantics for this language derived from a locally nameless representation and prove that it satisfies a number of desirable properties. We also present an implementation of our binding specification language as a GHC Haskell library implementing an embedded domain specific language (EDSL). By using Haskell type constructors to represent binding combinators, we implement the EDSL succinctly using datatype-generic programming. Our implementation supports a number of features necessary for practical programming, including flexibility in the treatment of user-defined types, best-effort name preservation (for error messages), and integration with Haskell's monad transformer library.

A Two-Level Logic Approach to Reasoning About Computations

Relational descriptions have been used in formalizing diverse computational notions, including, for example, operational semantics, typing, and acceptance by non-deterministic machines. We therefore propose a (restricted) logical theory over relations as a language for specifying such notions. Our specification logic is further characterized by an ability to explicitly treat binding in object languages. Once such a logic is fixed, a natural next question is how we might prove theorems about specifications written in it. We propose to use a second logic, called a reasoning logic, for this purpose. A satisfactory reasoning logic should be able to completely encode the specification logic. Associated with the specification logic are various notions of binding: for quantifiers within formulas, for eigenvariables within sequents, and for abstractions within terms. To provide a natural treatment of these aspects, the reasoning logic must encode binding structures as well as their associated notions of scope, free and bound variables, and capture-avoiding substitution. Further, to support arguments about provability, the reasoning logic should possess strong mechanisms for constructing proofs by induction and co-induction. We provide these capabilities here by using a logic called ${\cal G}$ which represents relations over λ-terms via definitions of atomic judgments, contains inference rules for induction and co-induction, and includes a special generic quantifier. We show how provability in the specification logic can be transparently encoded in ${\cal G}$ . We also describe an interactive theorem prover called Abella that implements ${\cal G}$ and this two-level logic approach and we present several examples that demonstrate the efficacy of Abella in reasoning about computations.

A study of substitution, using nominal techniques and Fraenkel–Mostowksi sets

Fraenkel–Mostowski (FM) set theory delivers a model of names and alpha-equivalence. This model, now generally called the ‘nominal’ model, delivers inductive datatypes of syntax with alpha-equivalence — rather than inductive datatypes of syntax, quotiented by alpha-equivalence. The treatment of names and alpha-equivalence extends to the entire sets universe. This has proven useful for developing ‘nominal’ theories of reasoning and programming on syntax with alpha-equivalence, because a sets universe includes elements representing functions, predicates, and behaviour. Often, we want names and alpha-equivalence to model capture-avoiding substitution. In this paper we show that FM set theory models capture-avoiding substitution for names in much the same way as it models alpha-equivalence; as an operation valid for the entire sets universe which coincides with the usual (inductively defined) operation on inductive datatypes. In fact, more than one substitution action is possible (they all agree on sets representing syntax). We present two distinct substitution actions, making no judgement as to which one is ‘right’ — we suspect this question has the same status as asking whether classical or intuitionistic logic is ‘right’. We describe the actions in detail, and describe the overall design issues involved in creating any substitution action on a sets universe. Along the way, we think in new ways about the structure of elements of FM set theory. This leads us to some interesting mathematical concepts, including the notions of planes and crucial elements, which we also describe in detail.

Capture-avoiding substitution as a nominal algebra

Abstract Substitution is fundamental to the theory of logic and computation. Is substitution something that we define on syntax on a case-by-case basis, or can we turn the idea of substitution into a mathematical object? We give axioms for substitution and prove them sound and complete with respect to a canonical model. As corollaries we obtain a useful conservativity result, and prove that equality-up-to-substitution is a decidable relation on terms. These results involve subtle use of techniques both from rewriting and algebra. A special feature of our method is the use of nominal techniques. These give us access to a stronger assertion language, which includes so-called ‘freshness’ or ‘capture-avoidance’ conditions. This means that the sense in which we axiomatise substitution (and prove soundness and completeness) is particularly strong, while remaining quite general.

A type-theoretic foundation for programming with higher-order abstract syntax and first-class substitutions

Higher-order abstract syntax (HOAS) is a simple, powerful technique for implementing object languages, since it directly supports common and tricky routines dealing with variables, such as capture-avoiding substitution and renaming. This is achieved by representing binders in the object-language via binders in the meta-language. However, enriching functional programming languages with direct support for HOAS has been a major challenge, because recursion over HOAS encodings requires one to traverse lambda-abstractions and necessitates programming with open objects. We present a novel type-theoretic foundation based on contextual modal types which allows us to recursively analyze open terms via higher-order pattern matching. By design, variables occurring in open terms can never escape their scope. Using several examples, we demonstrate that our framework provides a name-safe foundation to operations typically found in nominal systems. In contrast to nominal systems however, we also support capture-avoiding substitution operations and even provide first-class substitutions to the programmer. The main contribution of this paper is a syntax-directed bi-directional type system where we distinguish between the data language and the computation language together with the progress and preservation proof for our language.

Focusing and higher-order abstract syntax

Focusing is a proof-search strategy, originating in linear logic, that elegantly eliminates inessential nondeterminism, with one byproduct being a correspondence between focusing proofs and programs with explicit evaluation order. Higher-order abstract syntax (HOAS) is a technique for representing higher-order programming language constructs (e.g., λ's) by higher-order terms at the"meta-level", thereby avoiding some of the bureaucratic headaches of first-order representations (e.g., capture-avoiding substitution). This paper begins with a fresh, judgmental analysis of focusing for intuitionistic logic (with a full suite of propositional connectives), recasting the "derived rules" of focusing as iterated inductive definitions . This leads to a uniform presentation, allowing concise, modular proofs of the identity and cut principles. Then we show how this formulation of focusing induces, through the Curry-Howard isomorphism, a new kind of higher-order encoding of abstract syntax: functions are encoded by maps from patterns to expressions. Dually, values are encoded as patterns together with explicit substitutions . This gives us pattern-matching "for free", and lets us reason about a rich type system with minimal syntactic overhead. We describe how to translate the language and proof of type safety almost directly into Coq using HOAS, and finally, show how the system's modular design pays off in enabling a very simple extension with recursion and recursive types.

One-and-a-halfth-order Logic

The practice of first-order logic is replete with meta-level concepts. Most notably there are meta-variables ranging over formulae, variables, and terms, and properties of syntax such as alpha-equivalence, capture-avoiding substitution and assumptions about freshness of variables with respect to meta-variables. We present one-and-a-halfth-order logic, in which these concepts are made explicit. We exhibit both sequent and algebraic specifications of one-and-a-halfth-order logic derivability, show them equivalent, show that the derivations satisfy cut-elimination, and prove correctness of an interpretation of first-order logic within it. We discuss the technicalities in a wider context as a case-study for nominal algebra, as a logic in its own right, as an algebraisation of logic, as an example of how other systems might be treated, and also as a theoretical foundation for future implementation.

Boxes go bananas: Encoding higher-order abstract syntax with parametric polymorphism

Higher-order abstract syntax is a simple technique for implementing languages with functional programming. Object variables and binders are implemented by variables and binders in the host language. By using this technique, one can avoid implementing common and tricky routines dealing with variables, such as capture-avoiding substitution. However, despite the advantages this technique provides, it is not commonly used because it is difficult to write sound elimination forms (such as folds or catamorphisms) for higher-order abstract syntax. To fold over such a data type, one must either simultaneously define an inverse operation (which may not exist) or show that all functions embedded in the data type are parametric. In this paper, we show how first-class polymorphism can be used to guarantee the parametricity of functions embedded in higher-order abstract syntax. With this restriction, we implement a library of iteration operators over data structures containing functionals. From this implementation, we derive “fusion laws” that functional programmers may use to reason about the iteration operator. Finally, we show how this use of parametric polymorphism corresponds to the Schürmann, Despeyroux and Pfenning method of enforcing parametricity through modal types. We do so by using this library to give a sound and complete encoding of their calculus into System . This encoding can serve as a starting point for reasoning about higher-order structures in polymorphic languages.

A polymorphic modal type system for lisp-like multi-staged languages

This article presents a polymorphic modal type system and its principal type inference algorithm that conservatively extend ML by all of Lisp's staging constructs (the quasi-quotation system). The combination is meaningful because ML is a practical higher-order, impure, and typed language, while Lisp's quasi-quotation system has long evolved complying with the demands from multi-staged programming practices. Our type system supports open code, unrestricted operations on references, intentional variable-capturing substitution as well as capture-avoiding substitution, and lifting values into code, whose combination escaped all the previous systems.

Scrap your nameplate

Recent research has shown how boilerplate code, or repetitive code for traversing datatypes, can be eliminated using generic programming techniques already available within some implementations of Haskell. One particularly intractable kind of boilerplate is nameplate , or code having to do with names, name-binding, and fresh name generation. One reason for the difficulty is that operations on data structures involving names, as usually implemented, are not regular instances of standard map , fold , or zip operations. However, in nominal abstract syntax , an alternative treatment of names and binding based on swapping, operations such as α-equivalence, capture-avoiding substitution, and free variable set functions are much better-behaved.In this paper, we show how nominal abstract syntax techniques similar to those of FreshML can be provided as a Haskell library called FreshLib . In addition, we show how existing genericmprogramming techniques can be used to reduce the amount of nameplate code that needs to be written for new datatypes involving names and binding to almost nothing—in short, how to scrap your nameplate .

Boxes go bananas

Higher-order abstract syntax is a simple technique for implementing languages with functional programming. Object variables and binders are implemented by variables and binders in the host language. By using this technique, one can avoid implementing common and tricky routines dealing with variables, such as capture-avoiding substitution. However, despite the advantages this technique provides, it is not commonly used because it is difficult to write sound elimination forms (such as folds or catamorphisms) for higher-order abstract syntax. To fold over such a datatype, one must either simultaneously define an inverse operation (which may not exist) or show that all functions embedded in the datatype are parametri.In this paper, we show how first-class polymorphism can be used to guarantee the parametricity of functions embedded in higher-order abstract syntax. With this restriction, we implement a library of iteration operators over data-structures containing functionals. From this implementation, we derive "fusion laws" that functional programmers may use to reason about the iteration operator. Finally, we show how this use of parametric polymorphism corresponds to the Schürmann, Despeyroux and Pfenning method of enforcing parametricity through modal types. We do so by using this library to give a sound and complete encoding of their calculus into System F ? . This encoding can serve as a starting point for reasoning about higher-order structures in polymorphic languages.