Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

A verified framework for higher-order uncurrying optimizations

  • Published:
Higher-Order and Symbolic Computation

Abstract

Function uncurrying is an important optimization for the efficient execution of functional programming languages. This optimization replaces curried functions by uncurried, multiple-argument functions, while preserving the ability to evaluate partial applications. First-order uncurrying (where curried functions are optimized only in the static scopes of their definitions) is well understood and implemented by many compilers, but its extension to higher-order functions (where uncurrying can also be performed on parameters and results of higher-order functions) is challenging. This article develops a generic framework that expresses higher-order uncurrying optimizations as type-directed insertion of coercions, and prove its correctness. The proof uses step-indexed logical relations and was entirely mechanized using the Coq proof assistant.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abadi, M., Cardelli, L., Curien, P.L., Lévy, J.J.: Explicit substitutions. J. Funct. Program. 1(4), 375–416 (1991)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Acar, U.A., Ahmed, A., Blume, M.: Imperative self-adjusting computation. In: 35th Symposium Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 309–322. ACM, New York (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Aczel, P.: An introduction to inductive definitions. In: Barwise, J. (ed.) Handbook of Mathematical Logic. Studies in Logics and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 90, pp. 739–782. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1997)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Ahmed, A.J.: Semantics of types for mutable state. Ph.D. thesis,. Princeton University (2004)

  5. Ahmed, A.J.: Step-indexed syntactic logical relations for recursive and quantified types. In: Programming Languages and Systems, 15th European Symposium on Programming, ESOP 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3924, pp. 69–83. Springer, Berlin (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Appel, A.W.: Foundational proof-carrying code. In: Logic in Computer Science 2001, pp. 247–258. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Appel, A.W., McAllester, D.A.: An indexed model of recursive types for foundational proof-carrying code. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 23(5), 657–683 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Aydemir, B.E., Bohannon, A., Fairbairn, M., Foster, J.N., Pierce, B.C., Sewell, P., Vytiniotis, D., Washburn, G., Weirich, S., Zdancewic, S.: Mechanized metatheory for the masses: the POPLmark challenge. In: Int. Conf. on Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics (TPHOLs). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3603, pp. 50–65. Springer, Berlin (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bertot, Y., Castéran, P.: Interactive Theorem Proving and Program Development—Coq’Art: The Calculus of Inductive Constructions. EATCS Texts in Theoretical Computer Science. Springer, Berlin (2004)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Cardone, F., Hindley, J.R.: History of lambda-calculus and combinatory logic. In: Gabbay, D.M., Woods, J. (eds.) Logic from Russell to Church. Handbook of the History of Logic, vol. 5. North-Holland, Amsterdam (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Coq development team: The Coq proof assistant. Software and documentation available at http://coq.inria.fr/ (1989–2009)

  12. Cousineau, G., Curien, P.L., Mauny, M.: The categorical abstract machine. Sci. Comput. Program. 8(2), 173–202 (1987)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Curry, H.B., Feys, R.: Combinatory Logic, vol. I. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1958). 3rd edn. 1974

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Dargaye, Z.: Décurryfication certifiée. In: Journées Francophones des Langages Applicatifs (JFLA’07, pp. 119–134. INRIA, Rocquencourt (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Di Cosmo, R.: Isomorphisms of Types: From Lambda Calculus to Information Retrieval and Language Design. Birkhauser, Basel (1995)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Felleisen, M., Friedman, D.P.: Control operators, the SECD machine and the λ-calculus. In: Formal Description of Programming Concepts III, pp. 131–141. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Flanagan, C.: Hybrid type checking. In: 33rd Symposium Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 245–256. ACM, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hannan, J., Hicks, P.: Higher-order arity raising. In: International Conference on Functional Programming 1998, pp. 27–38. ACM, New York (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hannan, J., Hicks, P.: Higher-order uncurrying. High.-Order Symb. Comput. 13(3), 179–216 (2000)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Henglein, F.: Dynamic typing: syntax and proof theory. Sci. Comput. Program. 22(3), 197–230 (1994)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Henglein, F., Jørgensen, J.: Formally optimal boxing. In: 21st Symposium Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 213–226. ACM, New York (1994)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Krivine, J.L.: A call-by-name lambda-calculus machine. High.-Order Symb. Comput. 20(3), 199–207 (2007)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Landin, P.J.: The mechanical evaluation of expressions. Comput. J. 6, 308–320 (1964)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Leroy, X.: The ZINC experiment: an economical implementation of the ML language. Technical report 117, INRIA (1990)

  25. Leroy, X.: Unboxed objects and polymorphic typing. In: 19th Symposium Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 177–188. ACM, New York (1992)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Letouzey, P.: Extraction in Coq: An overview. In: Logic and Theory of Algorithms, Fourth Conference on Computability in Europe, CiE 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5028, pp. 359–369. Springer, Berlin (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Marlow, S., Peyton Jones, S.: Making a fast curry: push/enter vs eval/apply for higher-order languages. J. Funct. Program. 16(4–5), 375–414 (2006)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Necula, G.C.: Proof-carrying code. In: 24th Symposium Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 106–119. ACM, New York (1997)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Necula, G.C.: Translation validation for an optimizing compiler. In: Programming Language Design and Implementation 2000, pp. 83–95. ACM, New York (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Peyton Jones, S.L.: Implementing lazy functional languages on stock hardware: the spineless tagless G-machine. J. Funct. Program. 2(2), 127–202 (1992)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Pnueli, A., Siegel, M., Singerman, E.: Translation validation. In: Tools and Algorithms for Construction and Analysis of Systems, TACAS ’98. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1384, pp. 151–166. Springer, Berlin (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  32. Shivers, O.: Control-flow analysis in Scheme. In: Programming Language Design and Implementation 1988, pp. 164–174. ACM, New York (1988)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Siek, J.G., Taha, W.: Gradual typing for functional languages. In: Scheme and Functional Programming 2006, pp. 81–92. Technical report TR-2006-06, University of Chicago (2006)

  34. Statman, R.: Logical relations and the typed λ-calculus. Inf. Control 65(2/3), 85–97 (1985)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Thatte, S.R.: Quasi-static typing. In: 17th Symposium Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 367–381. ACM, New York (1990)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  36. Tristan, J.B., Leroy, X.: Formal verification of translation validators: a case study on instruction scheduling optimizations. In: 35th Symposium Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 17–27. ACM, New York (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Wells, J.B., Dimock, A., Muller, R., Turbak, F.: A calculus for polymorphic and polyvariant flow types. J. Funct. Program. 12(3), 183–227 (2002)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Wright, A.K., Cartwright, R.: A practical soft type system for scheme. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 19(1), 87–152 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Zaynah Dargaye

    Present address: CEA LIST, Saclay, 91191, Gif-sur-Yvette, France

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ENSIIE, 1, square de la Résistance, 91025, Évry, France

    Zaynah Dargaye

  2. INRIA Paris-Rocquencourt, Domaine de Voluceau, B.P. 105, 78153, Le Chesnay, France

    Xavier Leroy

Authors
  1. Zaynah Dargaye
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xavier Leroy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zaynah Dargaye.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dargaye, Z., Leroy, X. A verified framework for higher-order uncurrying optimizations. Higher-Order Symb Comput 22, 199–231 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10990-010-9050-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10990-010-9050-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation