The use of monads to structure functional programs is described. Monads provide a convenient framework for simulating e ects found in other languages, such as global state, exception handling, output, or non-determinism. Three case studies are looked at in detail: how monads ease the modi cation of a simple evaluator; how monads act as the basis of a datatype of arrays subject to in-place update; and how monads can be used to build parsers.

Category theorists invented monads in the 1960's to concisely express certain aspects of universal algebra. Functional programmers invented list comprehensions in the 1970's to concisely express certain programs involving lists. This paper shows how list comprehensions may be generalised to an arbitrary monad, and how the resulting programming feature can concisely express in a pure functional language some programs that manipulate state, handle exceptions, parse text, or invoke continuations. A new solution to the old problem of destructive array update is also presented. No knowledge of category theory is assumed.

JML is a behavioral interface specification language tailored to Java(TM). Besides pre- and postconditions, it also allows assertions to be intermixed with Java code; these aid verification and debugging. JML is designed to be used by working software engineers; to do this it follows Eiffel in using Java expressions in assertions. JML combines this idea from Eiffel with the model-based approach to specifications, typified by VDM and Larch, which results in greater expressiveness. Other expressiveness advantages over Eiffel include quantifiers, specification-only variables, and frame conditions. This paper discusses the goals of JML, the overall approach, and describes the basic features of the language through examples. It is intended for readers who have some familiarity with both Java and behavioral specification using pre- and postconditions. Copyright c ○ 1998-2005 Iowa State University This paper is part of JML and is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option) any later version. 1

Region-based memory management is an alternative to standard tracing garbage collection that makes potentially dangerous operations such as memory deallocation explicit but verifiably safe. In this article, we present a new compiler intermediate language, called the Capability Calculus, that supports region-based memory management and enjoys a provably safe type system. Unlike previous region-based type systems, region lifetimes need not be lexically scoped and yet the language may be checked for safety without complex analyses. Therefore, our type system may be deployed in settings such as extensible operating systems where both the performance and safety of untrusted code is important.

this paper is to marry effects to monads, writing T for a computation that yields a value in and may have effects delimited by oe. Now we have that ( is

This paper presents a static analysis tool that can automatically find memory leaks and deletions of dangling pointers in large C and C++ applications.

Abstract not found

Abstract Woo and Lam propose correspondence assertions for specifying authenticity properties of security protocols. The only prior work on checking correspondence assertions depends on model-checking and is limited to finite-state systems. We propose a dependent type and effect system for checking correspondence assertions. Since it is based on type-checking, our method is not limited to finite-state systems. This paper presents our system in the simple and general setting of the ss-calculus. We show how to type-check correctness properties of example communication protocols based on secure channels. In a related paper, we extend our system to the more complex and specific setting of checking cryptographic protocols based on encrypted messages sent over insecure channels. 1 Introduction Correspondence Assertions To a first approximation, a correspondence assertion about a communication protocol is an intention that follows the pattern: If one principal ever reaches a certain point in a protocol, then some other principal has previously reached some other matching point in the protocol.

Machine We have described the type constructor language of CL and the typing rules for the main term-level constructs. In fact, the previous section contains all of the ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol. TBD, No. TDB, Month Year. 20 D. Walker, K. Crary, and G. Morrisett #; #;# # h at r : # # # # f : Type #; ## # ; #{f :# f , x 1 :# 1 , . . . , xn :# n}; C # e # # f = #[# # ].(C, # 1 , . . . , #n ) # 0 at r f, x 1 , . . . , xn ## Dom(#) # #; #;# # fix f[# # ](C, x 1 :# 1 , . . . , xn :# n ).e at r : # f (h-fix) #; #;# # v i : # i (for 1 # i # n) # # r : Rgn #; #;# # #v 1 , . . . , vn # at r : ## 1 , . . . , #n # at r (h-tuple) #; #;# # h at r : # # # # # # = # : Type #; #;# # h at r : # (h-eq) #; #;# # v : # #; #;# # x : # (#(x) = #) (v-var) #; #;# # i : int (v-int) #; #;# # v : #[#:#, # # ].(C, # 1 , . . . , #n ) # 0 at r # # c : # #; #;# # v[c] : (#[# # ].(C, # 1 , . . . , #n ) # 0)[c/#] at r (v-type) #; #;# # v : #[# # C ## , # # ].(C # , # 1 , . . . , #n ) # 0 at r # # C # C ## #; #;# # v[C] : (#[# # ].(C # , # 1 , . . . , #n ) # 0)[C/#] at r (v-sub) #; #;# # v : # # # # # # = # : Type #; #;# # v : # (v-eq) Fig. 6. Capability static semantics: Heap and word values. information programmers or compilers require to write type-safe programs in CL. However, in order to prove a type soundness result in the style of Wright and Felleisen [Wright and Felleisen 1994], we must be able to type check programs at every step during their evaluation. In this section, we give the static semantics of the run-time values that are not normally manipulated by programmers, but are nevertheless necessary to prove our soundness result. At first, the formal definition ...

A tension in language design has been between simple semantics on the one hand, and rich possibilities for side-effects, exception handling and so on on the other. The introduction of monads has made a large step towards reconciling these alternatives. First proposed by Moggi as a way of structuring semantic descriptions, they were adopted by Wadler to structure Haskell programs, and now offer a general technique for delimiting the scope of effects, thus reconciling referential transparency and imperative operations within one programming language. Monads have been used to solve long-standing problems such as adding pointers and assignment, inter-language working, and exception handling to Haskell, without compromising its purely functional semantics. The course will introduce monads, effects and related notions, and exemplify their applications in programming (Haskell) and in compilation (MLj). The course will present typed metalanguages for monads and related categorica...