DOCSLIB.ORG

Introduction to Programming in ATS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Introduction to Programming in ATS Introduction to Programming in ATS Hongwei Xi ATS Trustful Software, Inc. Introduction to Programming in ATS by Hongwei Xi Copyright © 2010-201? Hongwei Xi As a programming language, ATS is both syntax-rich and feature-rich. This book introduces the reader to some core features of ATS, including basic functional programming, simple types, (recursively defined) datatypes, polymorphic types, dependent types, linear types, theorem-proving, programming with theorem-proving (PwTP), and template-based programming. Although the reader is not assumed to be familiar with programming in general, the book is likely to be rather dense for someone without considerable programming experience. All rights are reserved. Permission is granted to print this document for personal use. Dedication To Jinning, Zoe, and Chloe. Table of Contents Preface..................................................................................................................................................... vii I. Basic Functional Programming...........................................................................................................ix 1. Preparation for Starting..................................................................................................................1 1.1. A Running Program...........................................................................................................1 1.2. A Template for Single-File Programs................................................................................1 1.3. A Makefile Template.........................................................................................................2 2. Elements of Programming.............................................................................................................5 2.1. Expressions and Values.....................................................................................................5 2.2. Names and Bindings..........................................................................................................6 2.3. Scopes for Bindings...........................................................................................................6 2.4. Environments for Evaluation.............................................................................................7 2.5. Static Semantics.................................................................................................................8 2.6. Primitive Types..................................................................................................................8 2.7. Tuples and Tuple Types.....................................................................................................9 2.8. Records and Record Types..............................................................................................10 2.9. Conditional Expressions..................................................................................................11 2.10. Sequence Expressions...................................................................................................12 2.11. Comments in Code........................................................................................................13 3. Functions......................................................................................................................................14 3.1. Functions as a Simple Form of Abstraction....................................................................14 3.2. Function Arity.................................................................................................................15 3.3. Function Interface............................................................................................................16 3.4. Evaluation of Function Calls...........................................................................................17 3.5. Recursive Functions........................................................................................................17 3.6. Evaluation of Recursive Function Calls..........................................................................18 3.7. Example: Coin Changes for Fun.....................................................................................19 3.8. Tail-Call and Tail-Recursion............................................................................................20 3.9. Example: The Eight-Queens Puzzle................................................................................21 3.10. Mutually Recursive Functions.......................................................................................25 3.11. Mutually Defined Tail-Recursion..................................................................................25 3.12. Envless Functions and Closure-Functions.....................................................................27 3.13. Higher-Order Functions.................................................................................................29 3.14. Example: Binary Search for Fun...................................................................................31 3.15. Example: A Higher-Order Fun Puzzle..........................................................................31 3.16. Currying and Uncurrying..............................................................................................32 4. Datatypes......................................................................................................................................34 4.1. Patterns............................................................................................................................34 4.2. Pattern-Matching.............................................................................................................34 4.3. Matching Clauses and Case-Expressions........................................................................35 4.4. Enumerative Datatypes....................................................................................................36 4.5. Recursively Defined Datatypes.......................................................................................37 4.6. Exhaustiveness of Pattern-Matching...............................................................................38 4.7. Example: Binary Search Tree..........................................................................................39 4.8. Example: Evaluating Integer Expressions.......................................................................41 5. Parametric Polymorphism............................................................................................................45 5.1. Function Templates.........................................................................................................45 iv 5.2. Polymorphic Functions....................................................................................................47 5.3. Polymorphic Datatypes...................................................................................................48 5.4. Example: Function Templates on Lists...........................................................................50 5.5. Example: Mergesort on Lists...........................................................................................54 II. Support for Practical Programming.................................................................................................57 6. Effectful Programming Features..................................................................................................58 6.1. Exceptions.......................................................................................................................58 6.2. Example: Testing for Braun Trees...................................................................................60 6.3. References.......................................................................................................................63 6.4. Example: A Counter Implementation..............................................................................64 6.5. Arrays..............................................................................................................................65 6.6. Example: Ordering Permutations....................................................................................66 6.7. Matrices...........................................................................................................................69 6.8. Example: Estimating the Constant Pi..............................................................................71 6.9. Simple Input and Output.................................................................................................71 7. Modularity....................................................................................................................................75 7.1. Types as a Form of Specification.....................................................................................75 7.2. Static and Dynamic ATS Files.........................................................................................77 7.3. Generic Template Implementation..................................................................................80 7.4. Specific Template Implementation..................................................................................81 7.5. Abstract Types.................................................................................................................82 7.6. Example: A Package for Rationals..................................................................................85
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transmit Processing in MIMO Wireless Systems
    IEEE 6th CAS Symp. on Emerging Technologies: Mobile and Wireless Comm Shanghai, China, May 31-June 2,2004 Transmit Processing in MIMO Wireless Systems Josef A. Nossek, Michael Joham, and Wolfgang Utschick Institute for Circuit Theory and Signal Processing, Munich University of Technology, 80333 Munich, Germany Phone: +49 (89) 289-28501, Email: [email protected] Abstract-By restricting the receive filter to he scalar, we weighted by a scalar in Section IV. In Section V, we compare derive the optimizations for linear transmit processing from the linear transmit and receive processing. respective joint optimizations of transmit and receive filters. We A popular nonlinear transmit processing scheme is Tom- can identify three filter types similar to receive processing: the nmamit matched filter (TxMF), the transmit zero-forcing filter linson Harashima precoding (THP) originally proposed for (TxZE), and the transmil Menerfilter (TxWF). The TxW has dispersive single inpur single output (SISO) systems in [IO], similar convergence properties as the receive Wiener filter, i.e. [Ill, but can also be applied to MlMO systems [12], [13]. it converges to the matched filter and the zero-forcing Pter for THP is similar to decision feedback equalization (DFE), hut low and high signal to noise ratio, respectively. Additionally, the contrary to DFE, THP feeds back the already transmitted mean square error (MSE) of the TxWF is a lower hound for the MSEs of the TxMF and the TxZF. symbols to reduce the interference caused by these symbols The optimizations for the linear transmit filters are extended at the receivers. Although THP is based on the application of to obtain the respective Tomlinson-Harashimp precoding (THP) nonlinear modulo operators at the receivers and the transmitter, solutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Download the Basketballplayer.Ngql Fle Here
    Nebula Graph Database Manual v1.2.1 Min Wu, Amber Zhang, XiaoDan Huang 2021 Vesoft Inc. Table of contents Table of contents 1. Overview 4 1.1 About This Manual 4 1.2 Welcome to Nebula Graph 1.2.1 Documentation 5 1.3 Concepts 10 1.4 Quick Start 18 1.5 Design and Architecture 32 2. Query Language 43 2.1 Reader 43 2.2 Data Types 44 2.3 Functions and Operators 47 2.4 Language Structure 62 2.5 Statement Syntax 76 3. Build Develop and Administration 128 3.1 Build 128 3.2 Installation 134 3.3 Configuration 141 3.4 Account Management Statement 161 3.5 Batch Data Management 173 3.6 Monitoring and Statistics 192 3.7 Development and API 199 4. Data Migration 200 4.1 Nebula Exchange 200 5. Nebula Graph Studio 224 5.1 Change Log 224 5.2 About Nebula Graph Studio 228 5.3 Deploy and connect 232 5.4 Quick start 237 5.5 Operation guide 248 6. Contributions 272 6.1 Contribute to Documentation 272 6.2 Cpp Coding Style 273 6.3 How to Contribute 274 6.4 Pull Request and Commit Message Guidelines 277 7. Appendix 278 7.1 Comparison Between Cypher and nGQL 278 - 2/304 - 2021 Vesoft Inc. Table of contents 7.2 Comparison Between Gremlin and nGQL 283 7.3 Comparison Between SQL and nGQL 298 7.4 Vertex Identifier and Partition 303 - 3/304 - 2021 Vesoft Inc. 1. Overview 1. Overview 1.1 About This Manual This is the Nebula Graph User Manual.
    [Show full text]
  • Irrelevance, Heterogeneous Equality, and Call-By-Value Dependent Type Systems
    Irrelevance, Heterogeneous Equality, and Call-by-value Dependent Type Systems Vilhelm Sjoberg¨ Chris Casinghino Ki Yung Ahn University of Pennsylvania University of Pennsylvania Portland State University [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Nathan Collins Harley D. Eades III Peng Fu Portland State University University of Iowa University of Iowa [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Garrin Kimmell Tim Sheard Aaron Stump University of Iowa Portland State University University of Iowa [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Stephanie Weirich University of Pennsylvania [email protected] We present a full-spectrum dependently typed core language which includes both nontermination and computational irrelevance (a.k.a. erasure), a combination which has not been studied before. The two features interact: to protect type safety we must be careful to only erase terminating expressions. Our language design is strongly influenced by the choice of CBV evaluation, and by our novel treatment of propositional equality which has a heterogeneous, completely erased elimination form. 1 Introduction The Trellys project is a collaborative effort to design a new dependently typed programming language. Our goal is to bridge the gap between ordinary functional programming and program verification with dependent types. Programmers should be able to port their existing functional programs to Trellys with minor modifications, and then gradually add more expressive types as appropriate. This goal has implications for our design. First, and most importantly, we must consider nonter- mination and other effects. Unlike Coq and Agda, functional programming languages like OCaml and Haskell allow general recursive functions, so to accept functional programs ‘as-is’ we must be able to turn off the termination checker.
    [Show full text]
  • Three Methods of Finding Remainder on the Operation of Modular
    Zin Mar Win, Khin Mar Cho; International Journal of Advance Research and Development (Volume 5, Issue 5) Available online at: www.ijarnd.com Three methods of finding remainder on the operation of modular exponentiation by using calculator 1Zin Mar Win, 2Khin Mar Cho 1University of Computer Studies, Myitkyina, Myanmar 2University of Computer Studies, Pyay, Myanmar ABSTRACT The primary purpose of this paper is that the contents of the paper were to become a learning aid for the learners. Learning aids enhance one's learning abilities and help to increase one's learning potential. They may include books, diagram, computer, recordings, notes, strategies, or any other appropriate items. In this paper we would review the types of modulo operations and represent the knowledge which we have been known with the easiest ways. The modulo operation is finding of the remainder when dividing. The modulus operator abbreviated “mod” or “%” in many programming languages is useful in a variety of circumstances. It is commonly used to take a randomly generated number and reduce that number to a random number on a smaller range, and it can also quickly tell us if one number is a factor of another. If we wanted to know if a number was odd or even, we could use modulus to quickly tell us by asking for the remainder of the number when divided by 2. Modular exponentiation is a type of exponentiation performed over a modulus. The operation of modular exponentiation calculates the remainder c when an integer b rose to the eth power, bᵉ, is divided by a positive integer m such as c = be mod m [1].
    [Show full text]
  • The Best of Both Worlds?
    The Best of Both Worlds? Reimplementing an Object-Oriented System with Functional Programming on the .NET Platform and Comparing the Two Paradigms Erik Bugge Thesis submitted for the degree of Master in Informatics: Programming and Networks 60 credits Department of Informatics Faculty of mathematics and natural sciences UNIVERSITY OF OSLO Autumn 2019 The Best of Both Worlds? Reimplementing an Object-Oriented System with Functional Programming on the .NET Platform and Comparing the Two Paradigms Erik Bugge © 2019 Erik Bugge The Best of Both Worlds? http://www.duo.uio.no/ Printed: Reprosentralen, University of Oslo Abstract Programming paradigms are categories that classify languages based on their features. Each paradigm category contains rules about how the program is built. Comparing programming paradigms and languages is important, because it lets developers make more informed decisions when it comes to choosing the right technology for a system. Making meaningful comparisons between paradigms and languages is challenging, because the subjects of comparison are often so dissimilar that the process is not always straightforward, or does not always yield particularly valuable results. Therefore, multiple avenues of comparison must be explored in order to get meaningful information about the pros and cons of these technologies. This thesis looks at the difference between the object-oriented and functional programming paradigms on a higher level, before delving in detail into a development process that consisted of reimplementing parts of an object- oriented system into functional code. Using results from major comparative studies, exploring high-level differences between the two paradigms’ tools for modular programming and general program decompositions, and looking at the development process described in detail in this thesis in light of the aforementioned findings, a comparison on multiple levels was done.
    [Show full text]
  • Functional C
    Functional C Pieter Hartel Henk Muller January 3, 1999 i Functional C Pieter Hartel Henk Muller University of Southampton University of Bristol Revision: 6.7 ii To Marijke Pieter To my family and other sources of inspiration Henk Revision: 6.7 c 1995,1996 Pieter Hartel & Henk Muller, all rights reserved. Preface The Computer Science Departments of many universities teach a functional lan- guage as the first programming language. Using a functional language with its high level of abstraction helps to emphasize the principles of programming. Func- tional programming is only one of the paradigms with which a student should be acquainted. Imperative, Concurrent, Object-Oriented, and Logic programming are also important. Depending on the problem to be solved, one of the paradigms will be chosen as the most natural paradigm for that problem. This book is the course material to teach a second paradigm: imperative pro- gramming, using C as the programming language. The book has been written so that it builds on the knowledge that the students have acquired during their first course on functional programming, using SML. The prerequisite of this book is that the principles of programming are already understood; this book does not specifically aim to teach `problem solving' or `programming'. This book aims to: ¡ Familiarise the reader with imperative programming as another way of imple- menting programs. The aim is to preserve the programming style, that is, the programmer thinks functionally while implementing an imperative pro- gram. ¡ Provide understanding of the differences between functional and imperative pro- gramming. Functional programming is a high level activity.
    [Show full text]
  • Fast Integer Division – a Differentiated Offering from C2000 Product Family
    Application Report SPRACN6–July 2019 Fast Integer Division – A Differentiated Offering From C2000™ Product Family Prasanth Viswanathan Pillai, Himanshu Chaudhary, Aravindhan Karuppiah, Alex Tessarolo ABSTRACT This application report provides an overview of the different division and modulo (remainder) functions and its associated properties. Later, the document describes how the different division functions can be implemented using the C28x ISA and intrinsics supported by the compiler. Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 2 2 Different Division Functions ................................................................................................ 2 3 Intrinsic Support Through TI C2000 Compiler ........................................................................... 4 4 Cycle Count................................................................................................................... 6 5 Summary...................................................................................................................... 6 6 References ................................................................................................................... 6 List of Figures 1 Truncated Division Function................................................................................................ 2 2 Floored Division Function................................................................................................... 3 3 Euclidean
    [Show full text]
  • Why Dependent Types Matter
    Why Dependent Types Matter Thorsten Altenkirch Conor McBride James McKinna The University of Nottingham The University of St Andrews {txa,ctm}@cs.nott.ac.uk [email protected] Abstract We exhibit the rationale behind the design of Epigram, a dependently typed programming language and interactive program development system, using refinements of a well known program—merge sort—as a running example. We discuss its relationship with other proposals to introduce aspects of dependent types into functional programming languages and sketch some topics for further work in this area. 1. Introduction Types matter. That’s what they’re for—to classify data with respect to criteria which matter: how they should be stored in memory, whether they can be safely passed as inputs to a given operation, even who is allowed to see them. Dependent types are types expressed in terms of data, explicitly relating their inhabitants to that data. As such, they enable you to express more of what matters about data. While conventional type systems allow us to validate our programs with respect to a fixed set of criteria, dependent types are much more flexible, they realize a continuum of precision from the basic assertions we are used to expect from types up to a complete specification of the program’s behaviour. It is the programmer’s choice to what degree he wants to exploit the expressiveness of such a powerful type discipline. While the price for formally certified software may be high, it is good to know that we can pay it in installments and that we are free to decide how far we want to go.
    [Show full text]
  • Strength Reduction of Integer Division and Modulo Operations
    Strength Reduction of Integer Division and Modulo Operations Saman Amarasinghe, Walter Lee, Ben Greenwald M.I.T. Laboratory for Computer Science Cambridge, MA 02139, U.S.A. g fsaman,walt,beng @lcs.mit.edu http://www.cag.lcs.mit.edu/raw Abstract Integer division, modulo, and remainder operations are expressive and useful operations. They are logical candidates to express complex data accesses such as the wrap-around behavior in queues using ring buffers, array address calculations in data distribution, and cache locality compiler-optimizations. Experienced application programmers, however, avoid them because they are slow. Furthermore, while advances in both hardware and software have improved the performance of many parts of a program, few are applicable to division and modulo operations. This trend makes these operations increasingly detrimental to program performance. This paper describes a suite of optimizations for eliminating division, modulo, and remainder operations from programs. These techniques are analogous to strength reduction techniques used for multiplications. In addition to some algebraic simplifications, we present a set of optimization techniques which eliminates division and modulo operations that are functions of loop induction variables and loop constants. The optimizations rely on number theory, integer programming and loop transformations. 1 Introduction This paper describes a suite of optimizations for eliminating division, modulo, and remainder operations from pro- grams. In addition to some algebraic simplifications, we present a set of optimization techniques which eliminates division and modulo operations that are functions of loop induction variables and loop constants. These techniques are analogous to strength reduction techniques used for multiplications. Integer division, modulo, and remainder are expressive and useful operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Dependent Types: Easy As PIE
    Dependent Types: Easy as PIE Work-In-Progress Project Description Dimitrios Vytiniotis and Stephanie Weirich University of Pennsylvania Abstract Dependent type systems allow for a rich set of program properties to be expressed and mechanically verified via type checking. However, despite their significant expres- sive power, dependent types have not yet advanced into mainstream programming languages. We believe the reason behind this omission is the large design space for dependently typed functional programming languages, and the consequent lack of ex- perience in dependently-typed programming and language implementations. In this newly-started project, we lay out the design considerations for a general-purpose, ef- fectful, functional, dependently-typed language, called PIE. The goal of this project is to promote dependently-typed programming to a mainstream practice. 1 INTRODUCTION The goal of static type systems is to identify programs that contain errors. The type systems of functional languages, such as ML and Haskell, have been very successful in this respect. However, these systems can ensure only relatively weak safety properties—there is a wide range of semantic errors that these systems can- not eliminate. As a result, there is growing consensus [13, 15, 28, 27, 26, 6, 7, 20, 21, 16, 11, 2, 25, 19, 1, 22] that the right way to make static type systems more expressive in this respect is to adopt ideas from dependent type theory [12]. Types in dependent type systems can carry significant information about program values. For example, a datatype for network packets may describe the internal byte align- ment of variable-length subfields. In such precise type systems, programmers can express many of complex properties about programs—e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Dependent Types and Program Equivalence
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Departmental Papers (CIS) Department of Computer & Information Science 1-17-2010 Dependent types and Program Equivalence Limin Jia University of Pennsylvania Jianzhou Zhao University of Pennsylvania Vilhelm Sjoberg University of Pennsylvania Stephanie Weirich University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/cis_papers Part of the Computer Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Limin Jia, Jianzhou Zhao, Vilhelm Sjoberg, and Stephanie Weirich, "Dependent types and Program Equivalence", . January 2010. © ACM, 2010. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of ACM for your personal use. Not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in 37th ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, {(2010)} http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/10.1145/1707801.1706333 Email [email protected] This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/cis_papers/632 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Dependent types and Program Equivalence Abstract The definition of type equivalence is one of the most important design issues for any typed language. In dependently-typed languages, because terms appear in types, this definition must elyr on a definition of term equivalence. In that case, decidability of type checking requires decidability for the term equivalence relation. Almost all dependently-typed languages require this relation to be decidable. Some, such as Coq, Epigram or Agda, do so by employing analyses to force all programs to terminate. Conversely, others, such as DML, ATS, Omega, or Haskell, allow nonterminating computation, but do not allow those terms to appear in types.
    [Show full text]
  • Computing Mod Without Mod
    Computing Mod Without Mod Mark A. Will and Ryan K. L. Ko Cyber Security Lab The University of Waikato, New Zealand fwillm,[email protected] Abstract. Encryption algorithms are designed to be difficult to break without knowledge of the secrets or keys. To achieve this, the algorithms require the keys to be large, with some algorithms having a recommend size of 2048-bits or more. However most modern processors only support computation on 64-bits at a time. Therefore standard operations with large numbers are more complicated to implement. One operation that is particularly challenging to implement efficiently is modular reduction. In this paper we propose a highly-efficient algorithm for solving large modulo operations; it has several advantages over current approaches as it supports the use of a variable sized lookup table, has good spatial and temporal locality allowing data to be streamed, and only requires basic processor instructions. Our proposed algorithm is theoretically compared to widely used modular algorithms, before practically compared against the state-of-the-art GNU Multiple Precision (GMP) large number li- brary. 1 Introduction Modular reduction, also known as the modulo or mod operation, is a value within Y, such that it is the remainder after Euclidean division of X by Y. This operation is heavily used in encryption algorithms [6][8][14], since it can \hide" values within large prime numbers, often called keys. Encryption algorithms also make use of the modulo operation because it involves more computation when compared to other operations like add. Meaning that computing the modulo operation is not as simple as just adding bits.
    [Show full text]