On Friday October 17, this site was moved to a new server, https://mw.hh.se. The original address will continue to work. Whithin a week or two this site will return to the original address. /Peo HH IT-dep

WG211/Inoue: Difference between revisions

From WG 2.11
Jump to navigationJump to search
Created page with "'''Reasoning About Multi-stage Programs''' by Jon Inoue We settle three basic questions that naturally arise when verifying multi-stage functional programs. Firstly, does addin..."
(No difference)

Revision as of 20:25, 6 June 2012

Reasoning About Multi-stage Programs by Jon Inoue

We settle three basic questions that naturally arise when verifying multi-stage functional programs. Firstly, does adding staging to a language compromise any equalities that hold in the base language? Unfortunately it does, and more care is needed to reason about terms with free variables. Secondly, staging annotations, as the name "annotations" suggests, are often thought to be orthogonal to the behavior of a program, but when is this formally guaranteed to be true? We give termination conditions that characterize when this guarantee holds. Finally, do multi-stage languages satisfy useful, standard extensional facts, for example that functions agreeing on all arguments are equivalent? We provide a sound and complete notion of applicative bisimulation, which establishes such facts or, in principle, any valid program equivalence. These results greatly improve our understanding of staging, and allow us to prove the correctness of quite complicated multi-stage programs.