Functional
SetTheoretic Types for Polymorphic Variants by Giuseppe Castagna, Tommaso Petrucciani, and Kim Nguyễn:
Polymorphic variants are a useful feature of the OCaml language whose current definition and implementation rely on kinding constraints to simulate a subtyping relation via unification. This yields an awkward formalization and results in a type system whose behaviour is in some cases unintuitive and/or unduly restrictive.
In this work, we present an alternative formalization of polymorphic variants, based on settheoretic types and subtyping, that yields a cleaner and more streamlined system. Our formalization is more expressive than the current one (it types more programs while preserving type safety), it can internalize some metatheoretic properties, and it removes some pathological cases of the current implementation resulting in a more intuitive and, thus, predictable type system. More generally, this work shows how to add fullfledged union types to functional languages of the ML family that usually rely on the HindleyMilner type system. As an aside, our system also improves the theory of semantic subtyping, notably by proving completeness for the type reconstruction algorithm.
Looks like a nice result. They integrate union types and restricted intersection types for complete type inference, which prior work on CDuce could not do. The disadvantage is that it does not admit principal types, and so inference is nondeterministic (see section 5.3.2).
No value restriction is needed for algebraic effects and handlers, by Ohad Kammar and Matija Pretnar:
We present a straightforward, sound HindleyMilner polymorphic type system for algebraic effects and handlers in a callbyvalue calculus, which allows type variable generalisation of arbitrary computations, not just values. This result is surprising. On the one hand, the soundness of unrestricted callbyvalue HindleyMilner polymorphism is known to fail in the presence of computational effects such as reference cells and continuations. On the other hand, many programming examples can be recast to use effect handlers instead of these effects. Analysing the expressive power of effect handlers with respect to state effects, we claim handlers cannot express reference cells, and show they can simulate dynamically scoped state.
Looks like a nice integration of algebraic effects with simple HindlyMilner, but which yields some unintuitive conclusions. At least I certainly found the possibility of supporting dynamically scoped state but not reference cells surprising!
It highlights the need for some future work to support true reference cells, namely a polymorphic type and effect system to generate fresh instances.
Simon Peyton Jones has been elected as a Fellow of the Royal Society. The Royal Society biography reads:
Simon's main research interest is in functional programming languages, their implementation, and their application. He was a key contributor to the design of the nowstandard functional language Haskell, and is the lead designer of the widelyused Glasgow Haskell Compiler (GHC). He has written two textbooks about the implementation of functional languages.
More generally, Simon is interested in language design, rich type systems, compiler technology, code generation, runtime systems, virtual machines, and garbage collection. He is particularly motivated by direct use of principled theory to practical language design and implementation  that is one reason he loves functional programming so much.
Simon is also chair of Computing at School, the grassroots organisation that was at the epicentre of the 2014 reform of the English computing curriculum.
Congratulations SPJ!
Temporal Higher Order Contracts
Tim Disney, Cormac Flanagan, Jay McCarthy
2011
Behavioral contracts are embraced by software engineers because they document module interfaces, detect interface violations, and help identify faulty modules (packages, classes, functions, etc). This paper extends prior higherorder contract systems to also express and enforce temporal properties, which are common in software systems with imperative state, but which are mostly left implicit or are at best informally specified. The paper presents both a programmatic contract API as well as a temporal contract language, and reports on experience and performance results from implementing these contracts in Racket.
Our development formalizes module behavior as a trace of events such as function calls and returns. Our contract system provides both noninterference (where contracts cannot influence correct executions) and also a notion of completeness (where contracts can enforce any decidable, prefixclosed predicate on event traces).
This paper appears to be about a way to define (and enforce through dynamic monitoring) correctness properties of APIs by enforcing or ruling out certain orderings of function calls, such as calling a "read" method on a file descriptor after having called "close". I am personally not convinced that this specification language is a good way to solve these problems. However, the bulk of the paper is actually about giving a denotational semantics to contracts, as specifying a set of traces that the external interface of a component may expose (in a way strongly reminding of game semantics), and this feels like an important technique to reason about contracts. The exposition of this contribution is practical (based on a simple abstract machine) and accessible.
Designers of Elm want their compiler to produce friendly error messages. They show some examples of helpful error messages from their newer compiler on the blog post.
Compilers as Assistants
One of Elm’s goals is to change our relationship with compilers. Compilers should be assistants, not adversaries. A compiler should not just detect bugs, it should then help you understand why there is a bug. It should not berate you in a robot voice, it should give you specific hints that help you write better code. Ultimately, a compiler should make programming faster and more fun!
Breaking Through the Normalization Barrier: A SelfInterpreter for Fomega, by Matt Brown and Jens Palsberg:
According to conventional wisdom, a selfinterpreter for a strongly normalizing λcalculus is impossible. We call this the normalization barrier. The normalization barrier stems from a theorem in computability theory that says that a total universal function for the total computable functions is impossible. In this paper we break through the normalization barrier and define a selfinterpreter for System Fω, a strongly normalizing λcalculus. After a careful analysis of the classical theorem, we show that static type checking in Fω can exclude the proof’s diagonalization gadget, leaving open the possibility for a selfinterpreter. Along with the selfinterpreter, we program four other operations in Fω, including a continuationpassing style transformation. Our operations rely on a new approach to program representation that may be useful in theorem provers and compilers.
I haven't gone through the whole paper, but their claims are compelling. They have created selfinterpreters in System F, System Fω and System Fω+, which are all strongly normalizing typed languages. Previously, the only instance of this for a typed language was Girard's System U, which is not strongly normalizing. The key lynchpin appears in this paragraph on page 2:
Our result breaks through the normalization barrier. The conventional wisdom underlying the normalization barrier makes an implicit assumption that all representations will behave like their counterpart in the computability theorem, and therefore the theorem must apply to them as well. This assumption excludes other notions of representation, about which the theorem says nothing. Thus, our result does not contradict the theorem, but shows that the theorem is less farreaching than previously thought.
Pretty cool if this isn't too complicated in any given language. Could let one move some previously nontypesafe runtime features, into type safe libraries.
Optimizing Closures in O(0) time, by Andrew W. Keep, Alex Hearn, R. Kent Dybvig:
The flatclosure model for the representation of firstclass procedures is simple, safeforspace, and efficient, allowing the values or locations of free variables to be accessed with a single memory indirect. It is a straightforward model for programmers to understand, allowing programmers to predict the worstcase behavior of their programs. This paper presents a set of optimizations that improve upon the flatclosure model along with an algorithm that implements them, and it shows that the optimizations together eliminate over 50% of runtime closurecreation and freevariable access overhead in practice, with insignificant compiletime overhead. The optimizations never add overhead and remain safeforspace, thus preserving the benefits of the flatclosure model.
Looks like a nice and simple set of optimizations for probably the most widely deployed closure representation.
The Royal Society will award Xavier Leroy the Milner Award 2016
... in recognition of his research on the OCaml functional programming language and on the formal verification of compilers.
Xavier's replied:
It is very moving to see how far we have come, from Milner's great ideas of the 1970s to tools as powerful and as widely used as OCaml and Coq.
Freer Monads, More Extensible Effects, by Oleg Kiselyov and Hiromi Ishii:
We present a rational reconstruction of extensible effects, the recently proposed alternative to monad transformers, as the confluence of efforts to make effectful computations compose. Free monads and then extensible effects emerge from the straightforward term representation of an effectful computation, as more and more boilerplate is abstracted away. The generalization process further leads to freer monads, constructed without the Functor constraint.
The continuation exposed in freer monads can then be represented as an efficient typealigned data structure. The end result is the algorithmically efficient extensible effects library, which is not only more comprehensible but also faster than earlier implementations. As an illustration of the new library, we show three surprisingly simple applications: nondeterminism with committed choice (LogicT), catching IO exceptions in the presence of other effects, and the semiautomatic management of file handles and other resources through monadic regions.
We extensively use and promote the new sort of ‘laziness’, which underlies the left Kan extension: instead of performing an operation, keep its operands and pretend it is done.
This looks very promising, and includes some benchmarks comparing the heavily optimized and specialcased monad transformers against this new formulation of extensible effects using Freer monads.
See also the reddit discussion.
Reagents: Expressing and Composing Finegrained Concurrency, by Aaron Turon:
Efficient communication and synchronization is crucial for finegrained parallelism. Libraries providing such features, while indispensable, are difficult to write, and often cannot be tailored or composed to meet the needs of specific users. We introduce reagents, a set of combinators for concisely expressing concurrency algorithms. Reagents scale as well as their handcoded counterparts, while providing the composability existing libraries lack.
This is a pretty neat approach to writing concurrent code, which lies somewhere between manually implementing lowlevel concurrent algorithms and STM. Concurrent algorithms are expressed and composed seminaively, and Reagents automates the retries for you in case of thread interference (for transient failure of CAS updates), or they block waiting for input from another thread (in case of permanent failure where no input is available).
The core seems to be kCAS with synchronous communication between threads to coordinate reactions on shared state. The properties seem rather nice, as Aaron describes:
When used in isolation, reagents are guaranteed to perform only the CASes that the handwritten algorithm would, so they introduce no overhead on sharedmemory operations; by recoding an algorithm use reagents, you lose nothing. Yet unlike handwritten algorithms, reagents can be composed using choice, tailored with new blocking behavior, or combined into larger atomic blocks.
The benchmarks in section 6 look promising. This appears to be work towards Aaron's thesis which provides many more details.

Recent comments
6 days 2 hours ago
1 week 1 day ago
1 week 1 day ago
1 week 1 day ago
1 week 1 day ago
1 week 1 day ago
1 week 1 day ago
1 week 1 day ago
1 week 1 day ago
1 week 1 day ago