IA010: Principles of Programming Languages Types Achim Blumensath blumens@fi.muni.cz Faculty of Informatics, Masaryk University, Brno Static and dynamic typing Static typing: types of expressions are computed at compile-time Dynamic typing: runtime values are tagged with type information Static and dynamic typing Static typing: types of expressions are computed at compile-time Dynamic typing: runtime values are tagged with type information Dynamic typing • is slow • only catches type errors in executed code • more permissive and (sometimes) convenient ⇒ mostly useful (if at all) in scripting languages Static and dynamic typing Static typing • stricter, catches more errors • can prove that the program is free of type errors • no runtime overhead • can be inconvenient: might need additional code/annotations • not all properties can be checked statically (array bounds) • error messages from the type checker can be hard to understand • type annotations help document the code • types can be used to control the behaviour of code (overloading) • indispensable for serious software development: • proves the absence of certain errors • helps with interface design • helps with refactoring • advantages apply mostly to symbolic computations, less so to numeric ones Type annotations New syntax ⟨expr⟩ = . . . let ⟨id⟩ : ⟨type⟩ = ⟨expr⟩ ; ⟨expr⟩ let ⟨id⟩ ( ⟨id⟩ : ⟨type⟩ ) : ⟨type⟩ { ⟨expr⟩ }; ⟨expr⟩ fun( ⟨id⟩ : ⟨type⟩ ) : ⟨type⟩ { ⟨expr⟩ } Basic types int a -> b type foo = | A(a,b,...) | ... | Z(c,d,...); let fac(n: int) : int { if n == 0 then 1 else n * fac(n-1) }; let compose(f: int -> int, g: int -> int): int -> int { fun (x: int) { f(g(x)) } }; Common types Basic types • integers (signed/unsigned, various precisions, including arbitrary precision) • floating point numbers, decimal numbers (0000.00), arbitrary precision rational numbers • integer ranges (1..100) • enumerations (enum colours { Red, Green, Blue, Yellow }) • booleans • characters • strings • the empty type, the unit type Common types Composite types • arrays • pointers, references • functions, procedures • records, tuples • unions, variants • lists, maps, dictionaries Arrays Definition homogeneous collection indexed by an ordinal type Possible variations • index type: integers, ranges, enumeration types • dimension: 1-dimensional, many-dimensional Remarks • F������ is famous for its extensive array support • bounds checking must be done dynamically Array slices (not necessarily contiguous) subsets of an array One-dimensional Two-dimensional Product and sum types Product types inhomogeneous collection of elements of a fixed size: tuples, records type triple = int * int * int; type vector = [ x : float, y : float, z : float ]; Product and sum types Product types inhomogeneous collection of elements of a fixed size: tuples, records type triple = int * int * int; type vector = [ x : float, y : float, z : float ]; Sum types alternative between several types: tagged unions, variant types, algebraic types type int_list = | Nil | Cons(int, int_list); type expr = | Num(int) | Plus(expr, expr) | Times(expr, expr); type nat = | Zero | Suc(nat) Unit and void Unit type type with a single value type unit = | Nothing; • Can be used for functions that do not take arguments or do not return a value. Unit and void Unit type type with a single value type unit = | Nothing; • Can be used for functions that do not take arguments or do not return a value. Void type type with no value type void = ; • When used as argument type of a function, you cannot call it. • When used as return type, the function does not terminate. Recursive types types who are used in their own definition type expr = | Num(int) | Plus(expr, expr) | Times(expr, expr); • usually the recursion is via a pointer • some languages allow arbitrary recursive definitions type t = t -> t Example: recursion operator type b = b -> a; let rec(f : a -> a) : a = (fun (x : b) : a { f(x(x)) }) (fun (x : b) : a { f(x(x)) }); Type equivalence Name equivalence Two types are equivalent if they have the same name. Structural equivalence Two types are equivalent if they have the same definition. type vector = [ x : int, y : int ]; type pair = [ x : int, y : int ]; type pair2 = [ y : int, x : int ]; Type conversions Cast explicit conversion Coercion implicit conversion • convenient • can make code hard to understand Variations • If the memory representation is the same, we can just change the type. • Otherwise, we have to convert the value. • We need a runtime check, if not every value can be converted to the new type. • Some languages support non-converting type casts. Polymorphism Some code works without changes for several types. Polymorphism Some code works without changes for several types. What is the type of fun (x) { x } Polymorphism Some code works without changes for several types. What is the type of fun (x) { x } int -> int Polymorphism Some code works without changes for several types. What is the type of fun (x) { x } int -> int float -> float Polymorphism Some code works without changes for several types. What is the type of fun (x) { x } int -> int float -> float string -> string (int -> unit) -> (int -> unit) ... Forms of polymorphism • Ad-hoc polymorphism (also called overloading) • Parametric polymorphism (in ML-like languages) • Subtyping polymorphism (in object-oriented languages) Forms of polymorphism • Ad-hoc polymorphism (also called overloading) • Parametric polymorphism (in ML-like languages) • Subtyping polymorphism (in object-oriented languages) Ad-hoc polymorphism • several versions of a function • selection depending on argument types + : int -> int -> int + : float -> float -> float + : string -> string -> string • Advantages: • flexible • Disadvantages: • one has to write a separate function for every type • program can become harder to understand Forms of polymorphism • Ad-hoc polymorphism (also called overloading) • Parametric polymorphism (in ML-like languages) • Subtyping polymorphism (in object-oriented languages) Parametric polymorphism • types can contain type variables map : (a -> b) -> list(a) -> list(b) • Advantages: • simple, clean, easy to understand, few drawbacks • Disadvantages: • less flexible than ad-hoc polymorphism Forms of polymorphism • Ad-hoc polymorphism (also called overloading) • Parametric polymorphism (in ML-like languages) • Subtyping polymorphism (in object-oriented languages) Subtyping polymorphism • a is a subtype of b if every value of type a can be used where type b is expected. (a is a specialisation of b, b is more general.) • basis of object-oriented programming • makes the type system much more complicated Type inspection • branching on values of type variables • at compile-time or runtime • add power of overloading to parametric polymorphism let serialise(value) { case type_of(value) | int => int_to_string(value) | bool => bool_to_string(value) | string => sanitise_string(value) | cons => "cons(" ++ serialise(fst(value)) ++ "," ++ serialise(snd(value)) ++ ")" | ... }; Type inference Problem Writing type annotations is tedious, especially if the types are complex and long. Solution The compiler derives the types automatically without annotation. • Developed for ML by Damas, Hindley, and Milner. • For languages with more complex type systems, this is only partially possible. Idea Given an expression, look at all subexpressions and create a system of type equations. let twice(x) { 2 * x }; . Type inference Problem Writing type annotations is tedious, especially if the types are complex and long. Solution The compiler derives the types automatically without annotation. • Developed for ML by Damas, Hindley, and Milner. • For languages with more complex type systems, this is only partially possible. Idea Given an expression, look at all subexpressions and create a system of type equations. let twice(x) { 2 * x }; let compose(f, g) { fun (x) { f(g(x)) } }; . Type inference Problem Writing type annotations is tedious, especially if the types are complex and long. Solution The compiler derives the types automatically without annotation. • Developed for ML by Damas, Hindley, and Milner. • For languages with more complex type systems, this is only partially possible. Idea Given an expression, look at all subexpressions and create a system of type equations. let twice(x) { 2 * x }; let compose(f, g) { fun (x) { f(g(x)) } }; let sum(lst) = fold(fun (acc,x) { acc + x }, 0, lst); Unification solving a type equation s = t x = t ↝ x = t s = x ↝ x = s s → s′ = t → t′ ↝ s = t ∧ s′ = t′ c(s1, . . . , sn) = c(t1, . . . , tn) ↝ s1 = t1 ∧ ⋅⋅⋅ ∧ sn = tn s = t ↝ failure Advantages of type inference • convenient, less friction • finds the most general type • automatically introduces polymorphism Disadvantages • Type annotations serve as documentation. • Error messages from the type checker are more complicated. (It hides where the type error occurred.) Advanced topics • linear types • dependent types • gradual typing • using types for software verification