Logic in your Programs:

Use the compiler to prove your business logic.

"Correct Software"

What does it mean for software to be “correct”?

There are three main criteria:

  • There must be very strong evidence that the properties under question are true and the evidence for this must be independently verifiable.
     
  • It must continue to function as required for all possible inputs.
     
  • It must carry out these functions and do nothing else.

How to make it practical: exceptions, contracts, loops.
These things are still needed..

A convincing demonstration of correctness being impossible as long as the mechanism is regarded as a black box, our only hope lies in not regarding the mechanism as a black box.

Dijkstra (1970) "Notes On Structured Programming"

By using types to shed light into your assertions and invariants your compiler is then a proof assistant.

Word on the Street

... Prove it otherwise ...

Can Existence be Truth?

Let's define a TYPE to be True if it has values, and False if it has no values.

A Type's inhabitence can also be unknown, and it's truth value is undecidable.

Let's choose to only work with types that are True.

... Prove it otherwise ...

Logic in the Types.

//In other words:
def true: Unit = () // not true: Boolean
def false: Nothing = ??? // not false: Boolean

... and these ideas are shaping new foundations for mathematics ...

We can prove logical statements by constructing elements of types

def intToString: Int => String = _.toString
def times2: Int => Int = a => a * a
def always[A]: A => Option[A] = Some(_)

Logic

Constructive Logic as types...


// Constructive Connectives
type False = Nothing

type And[A, B] = (A, B)
type Or[A, B] = Either[A, B]
type Implication[A, B] = A => B

Proofs, or code paths, like any good story, or program run have a beginning, a middle and an end:

What's a Proof?

  1. Assumptions.
    Our domain types.

  2. Statements in order.
    Functions.

  3. The goal.
    A value.

Let's write some proofs code.

Ingredients for Correctness

  • It must carry out the functions that are required and do nothing else.
     
  • It must continue to function as required for all possible inputs.
     
  • There must be very strong evidence that these properties are true and the evidence for this must be independently verifiable.

... can constructivism be practical? ...

In terms of Computation

  • Total Functions (e.g. don't throw exceptions)
  • Referential Transparency (e.g. avoid side effects)
  • Termination (e.g. avoid loops)

Total Functions

Expand the Output.

def decode[A](s: String): A
def decode[A](s: String): Either[Error, A]

Excercises: http://bit.ly/cp-total-exercises

Total Functions

Restrict input values.

def squareRoot(a: Int): Int = ...
def squareRoot(a: UnsignedInt): UnisignedInt = ...

Excercises: http://bit.ly/cp-total-exercises

Referential Transparency

Avoid mutation

var x = 5 = 3
val x = 5 = 3 // Exception

if (x = 1) // Oops

r = open("w")
r = open("y") // Oops

Exercises: http://bit.ly/cp-transparency-excercises

Referential Transparency

Decouple evaluation

def cpsSystemTime: () => Timestamp = ...
def systemTime: IO[Timestamp] = ...

systemTime()
doSomething()
sleep(1)
systemTime()
doSomethingElse()

Exercises: http://bit.ly/cp-transparency-excercises

Termination

Avoid recursion

//hmmm: http://stainless.epfl.ch/doc/intro.html
def use[A](a: A): A = use(a) 

def sum(l: List[Int]): Int = l.fold(0)(_ + _)

Turing's Halting Problem ≃ Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems

Excercises: http://bit.ly/cp-termination-excercises

Termination

Avoid loops

def use[A](a: A): A = while (true) { ... }; a

val fib = 0 #:: fib.scanLeft(1)(_ + _)

Excercises: http://bit.ly/cp-termination-excercises

Is it really that simple?

Yes.

But we want to build a giant system!

Category Theory is the study of composition.

Constructive programming is a family of of Proof calculi aligned with goal of productive software development.

State some initial propostions.

sealed trait Person
case class Teacher(name: String, students: List[Person]) 
  extends Person
case class Student(name: String, teacher: Teacher) 
  extends Person
type Pay = Double
type Fee = Double
type Balance = Double

Provide evidence for further statements.

def payCalc: Teacher => Pay = _.students.foldLeft(0.0){
  case (pay, t:Teacher) => pay + 0.1 * payCalc(t)
  case (pay, s:Student) => pay + 2.5
}
def feeCalc: Student => Fee = _ match {
  case Student(_, t) => 1.10 * payCalc(t) / t.students.length
}
def feeBalance: Fee => Balance = identity
def payBalance: Pay => Balance = - _

Quantify the

boundaries as necesary.

def findPerson(name: String): 
  Option[Either[Student, Teacher]] = ???

Use category theory for composition.

def findPerson(name: String): 
  Option[Either[Student, Teacher]] = ???
val names: List[String] = ???

val schoolBalance: Balance = names
  .flatMap(findPerson)
  .map(feeCalc.choose(payCalc))
  .foldMap(feeBalance.choice(payBalance))
// res: Balance = 0.0

Reference Material

  • Constructive Programming Portal:
    https://constructive.dev
  • Exercises:
    http://bit.ly/cp-logic-exercises
  • Proposed solutions:
    http://bit.ly/cp-logic-answers
  • These slides:
    http://bit.ly/cp-logic-slides

Further Reading (References)

  • http://cheng.staff.shef.ac.uk/proofguide/proofguide.pdf

  • http://math.andrej.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Spartan-Type-Theory.pdf

  • http://ecee.colorado.edu/ecen5533/fall11/reading/free.pdf

  • http://tesi.cab.unipd.it/56555/1/tesi_Mengato_def.pdf

  • http://www.lix.polytechnique.fr/~lengrand/Work/Teaching/MPRI/Notes.pdf

  • https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspondence

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOiZatlZtGU

  • http://math.andrej.com/2016/08/09/what-is-a-formal-proof/

  • https://github.com/Chymyst/curryhoward

Logic in your Types

By Rodolfo Hansen

Made with Slides.com

Logic in your Types

Use the compiler to prove your business logic.

  • 112

More from Rodolfo Hansen