How to make ad-hoc polymorphism less ad hoc
POPL '89 Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages
FPCA '89 Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Functional programming languages and computer architecture
ESOP '94 Selected papers of ESOP '94, the 5th European symposium on Programming
Proofs About Lists Using Ellipsis
LPAR '99 Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Logic Programming and Automated Reasoning
Containers: constructing strictly positive types
Theoretical Computer Science - Applied semantics: Selected topics
FOSSACS'03/ETAPS'03 Proceedings of the 6th International conference on Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures and joint European conference on Theory and practice of software
Proving properties about lists using containers
FLOPS'08 Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Functional and logic programming
Testing polymorphic properties
ESOP'10 Proceedings of the 19th European conference on Programming Languages and Systems
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Bundy and Richardson [4] developed a method for reasoning about functions manipulating lists which is based on separating shape from content, and then exploiting a mathematically convenient representation for expressing shape-only manipulations. Later, Prince et al. [7] extended the technique to other data structures, and gave it a more formal basis via the theory of containers. All these results are restricted to fully polymorphic functions. For example, functions using equality tests on list elements are out of reach. We remedy this situation by developing new abstractions and representations for less polymorphic functions. In Haskell speak, we extend the earlier approach to be applicable in the presence of (certain) type class constraints.