-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
Stlc.v
804 lines (613 loc) · 24 KB
/
Stlc.v
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
(** * Stlc: The Simply Typed Lambda-Calculus *)
Require Export Types.
(* ###################################################################### *)
(** * The Simply Typed Lambda-Calculus *)
(** The simply typed lambda-calculus (STLC) is a tiny core calculus
embodying the key concept of _functional abstraction_, which shows
up in pretty much every real-world programming language in some
form (functions, procedures, methods, etc.).
We will follow exactly the same pattern as in the previous
chapter when formalizing this calculus (syntax, small-step
semantics, typing rules) and its main properties (progress and
preservation). The new technical challenges (which will take some
work to deal with) all arise from the mechanisms of _variable
binding_ and _substitution_. *)
(* ###################################################################### *)
(** ** Overview *)
(** The STLC is built on some collection of _base types_ -- booleans,
numbers, strings, etc. The exact choice of base types doesn't
matter -- the construction of the language and its theoretical
properties work out pretty much the same -- so for the sake of
brevity let's take just [Bool] for the moment. At the end of the
chapter we'll see how to add more base types, and in later
chapters we'll enrich the pure STLC with other useful constructs
like pairs, records, subtyping, and mutable state.
Starting from the booleans, we add three things:
- variables
- function abstractions
- application
This gives us the following collection of abstract syntax
constructors (written out here in informal BNF notation -- we'll
formalize it below).
*)
(** Informal concrete syntax:
t ::= x variable
| \x:T1.t2 abstraction
| t1 t2 application
| true constant true
| false constant false
| if t1 then t2 else t3 conditional
*)
(** The [\] symbol (backslash, in ascii) in a function abstraction
[\x:T1.t2] is generally written as a greek letter "lambda" (hence
the name of the calculus). The variable [x] is called the
_parameter_ to the function; the term [t2] is its _body_. The
annotation [:T] specifies the type of arguments that the function
can be applied to. *)
(** Some examples:
- [\x:Bool. x]
The identity function for booleans.
- [(\x:Bool. x) true]
The identity function for booleans, applied to the boolean [true].
- [\x:Bool. if x then false else true]
The boolean "not" function.
- [\x:Bool. true]
The constant function that takes every (boolean) argument to
[true]. *)
(**
- [\x:Bool. \y:Bool. x]
A two-argument function that takes two booleans and returns
the first one. (Note that, as in Coq, a two-argument function
is really a one-argument function whose body is also a
one-argument function.)
- [(\x:Bool. \y:Bool. x) false true]
A two-argument function that takes two booleans and returns
the first one, applied to the booleans [false] and [true].
Note that, as in Coq, application associates to the left --
i.e., this expression is parsed as [((\x:Bool. \y:Bool. x)
false) true].
- [\f:Bool->Bool. f (f true)]
A higher-order function that takes a _function_ [f] (from
booleans to booleans) as an argument, applies [f] to [true],
and applies [f] again to the result.
- [(\f:Bool->Bool. f (f true)) (\x:Bool. false)]
The same higher-order function, applied to the constantly
[false] function. *)
(** As the last several examples show, the STLC is a language of
_higher-order_ functions: we can write down functions that take
other functions as arguments and/or return other functions as
results.
Another point to note is that the STLC doesn't provide any
primitive syntax for defining _named_ functions -- all functions
are "anonymous." We'll see in chapter [MoreStlc] that it is easy
to add named functions to what we've got -- indeed, the
fundamental naming and binding mechanisms are exactly the same.
The _types_ of the STLC include [Bool], which classifies the
boolean constants [true] and [false] as well as more complex
computations that yield booleans, plus _arrow types_ that classify
functions. *)
(**
T ::= Bool
| T1 -> T2
For example:
- [\x:Bool. false] has type [Bool->Bool]
- [\x:Bool. x] has type [Bool->Bool]
- [(\x:Bool. x) true] has type [Bool]
- [\x:Bool. \y:Bool. x] has type [Bool->Bool->Bool] (i.e. [Bool -> (Bool->Bool)])
- [(\x:Bool. \y:Bool. x) false] has type [Bool->Bool]
- [(\x:Bool. \y:Bool. x) false true] has type [Bool]
*)
(* ###################################################################### *)
(** ** Syntax *)
Module STLC.
(* ################################### *)
(** *** Types *)
Inductive ty : Type :=
| TBool : ty
| TArrow : ty -> ty -> ty.
(* ################################### *)
(** *** Terms *)
Inductive tm : Type :=
| tvar : id -> tm
| tapp : tm -> tm -> tm
| tabs : id -> ty -> tm -> tm
| ttrue : tm
| tfalse : tm
| tif : tm -> tm -> tm -> tm.
(** Note that an abstraction [\x:T.t] (formally, [tabs x T t]) is
always annotated with the type [T] of its parameter, in contrast
to Coq (and other functional languages like ML, Haskell, etc.),
which use _type inference_ to fill in missing annotations. We're
not considering type inference here, to keep things simple. *)
(** Some examples... *)
Definition x := (Id 0).
Definition y := (Id 1).
Definition z := (Id 2).
Hint Unfold x.
Hint Unfold y.
Hint Unfold z.
(** [idB = \x:Bool. x] *)
Notation idB :=
(tabs x TBool (tvar x)).
(** [idBB = \x:Bool->Bool. x] *)
Notation idBB :=
(tabs x (TArrow TBool TBool) (tvar x)).
(** [idBBBB = \x:(Bool->Bool) -> (Bool->Bool). x] *)
Notation idBBBB :=
(tabs x (TArrow (TArrow TBool TBool)
(TArrow TBool TBool))
(tvar x)).
(** [k = \x:Bool. \y:Bool. x] *)
Notation k := (tabs x TBool (tabs y TBool (tvar x))).
(** [notB = \x:Bool. if x then false else true] *)
Notation notB := (tabs x TBool (tif (tvar x) tfalse ttrue)).
(** (We write these as [Notation]s rather than [Definition]s to make
things easier for [auto].) *)
(* ###################################################################### *)
(** ** Operational Semantics *)
(** To define the small-step semantics of STLC terms, we begin -- as
always -- by defining the set of values. Next, we define the
critical notions of _free variables_ and _substitution_, which are
used in the reduction rule for application expressions. And
finally we give the small-step relation itself. *)
(* ################################### *)
(** *** Values *)
(** To define the values of the STLC, we have a few cases to consider.
First, for the boolean part of the language, the situation is
clear: [true] and [false] are the only values. An [if]
expression is never a value. *)
(** Second, an application is clearly not a value: It represents a
function being invoked on some argument, which clearly still has
work left to do. *)
(** Third, for abstractions, we have a choice:
- We can say that [\x:T.t1] is a value only when [t1] is a
value -- i.e., only if the function's body has been
reduced (as much as it can be without knowing what argument it
is going to be applied to).
- Or we can say that [\x:T.t1] is always a value, no matter
whether [t1] is one or not -- in other words, we can say that
reduction stops at abstractions.
Coq, in its built-in functional programming langauge, makes the
first choice -- for example,
Compute (fun x:bool => 3 + 4)
yields [fun x:bool => 7].
Most real-world functional programming languages make the second
choice -- reduction of a function's body only begins when the
function is actually applied to an argument. We also make the
second choice here. *)
Inductive value : tm -> Prop :=
| v_abs : forall x T t,
value (tabs x T t)
| v_true :
value ttrue
| v_false :
value tfalse.
Hint Constructors value.
(** Finally, we must consider what constitutes a _complete_ program.
Intuitively, a "complete" program must not refer to any undefined
variables. We'll see shortly how to define the "free" variables
in a STLC term. A program is "closed", that is, it contains no
free variables.
*)
(** Having made the choice not to reduce under abstractions,
we don't need to worry about whether variables are values, since
we'll always be reducing programs "from the outside in," and that
means the [step] relation will always be working with closed
terms (ones with no free variables). *)
(* ###################################################################### *)
(** *** Substitution *)
(** Now we come to the heart of the STLC: the operation of
substituting one term for a variable in another term.
This operation will be used below to define the operational
semantics of function application, where we will need to
substitute the argument term for the function parameter in the
function's body. For example, we reduce
(\x:Bool. if x then true else x) false
to
if false then true else false
]]
by substituting [false] for the parameter [x] in the body of the
function.
In general, we need to be able to substitute some given
term [s] for occurrences of some variable [x] in another term [t].
In informal discussions, this is usually written [ [x:=s]t ] and
pronounced "substitute [x] with [s] in [t]." *)
(** Here are some examples:
- [[x:=true] (if x then x else false)] yields [if true then true else false]
- [[x:=true] x] yields [true]
- [[x:=true] (if x then x else y)] yields [if true then true else y]
- [[x:=true] y] yields [y]
- [[x:=true] false] yields [false] (vacuous substitution)
- [[x:=true] (\y:Bool. if y then x else false)] yields [\y:Bool. if y then true else false]
- [[x:=true] (\y:Bool. x)] yields [\y:Bool. true]
- [[x:=true] (\y:Bool. y)] yields [\y:Bool. y]
- [[x:=true] (\x:Bool. x)] yields [\x:Bool. x]
The last example is very important: substituting [x] with [true] in
[\x:Bool. x] does _not_ yield [\x:Bool. true]! The reason for
this is that the [x] in the body of [\x:Bool. x] is _bound_ by the
abstraction: it is a new, local name that just happens to be
spelled the same as some global name [x]. *)
(** Here is the definition, informally...
[x:=s]x = s
[x:=s]y = y if x <> y
[x:=s](\x:T11.t12) = \x:T11. t12
[x:=s](\y:T11.t12) = \y:T11. [x:=s]t12 if x <> y
[x:=s](t1 t2) = ([x:=s]t1) ([x:=s]t2)
[x:=s]true = true
[x:=s]false = false
[x:=s](if t1 then t2 else t3) =
if [x:=s]t1 then [x:=s]t2 else [x:=s]t3
]]
*)
(** ... and formally: *)
Reserved Notation "'[' x ':=' s ']' t" (at level 20).
Fixpoint subst (x:id) (s:tm) (t:tm) : tm :=
match t with
| tvar x' =>
if eq_id_dec x x' then s else t
| tabs x' T t1 =>
tabs x' T (if eq_id_dec x x' then t1 else ([x:=s] t1))
| tapp t1 t2 =>
tapp ([x:=s] t1) ([x:=s] t2)
| ttrue =>
ttrue
| tfalse =>
tfalse
| tif t1 t2 t3 =>
tif ([x:=s] t1) ([x:=s] t2) ([x:=s] t3)
end
where "'[' x ':=' s ']' t" := (subst x s t).
(** _Technical note_: Substitution becomes trickier to define if we
consider the case where [s], the term being substituted for a
variable in some other term, may itself contain free variables.
Since we are only interested here in defining the [step] relation
on closed terms (i.e., terms like [\x:Bool. x], that do not mention
variables are not bound by some enclosing lambda), we can skip
this extra complexity here, but it must be dealt with when
formalizing richer languages. *)
(** *** *)
(** **** Exercise: 3 stars (substi) *)
(** The definition that we gave above uses Coq's [Fixpoint] facility
to define substitution as a _function_. Suppose, instead, we
wanted to define substitution as an inductive _relation_ [substi].
We've begun the definition by providing the [Inductive] header and
one of the constructors; your job is to fill in the rest of the
constructors. *)
Inductive substi (s:tm) (x:id) : tm -> tm -> Prop :=
| s_var1 :
substi s x (tvar x) s
(* FILL IN HERE *)
.
Hint Constructors substi.
Theorem substi_correct : forall s x t t',
[x:=s]t = t' <-> substi s x t t'.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.
(** [] *)
(* ################################### *)
(** *** Reduction *)
(** The small-step reduction relation for STLC now follows the same
pattern as the ones we have seen before. Intuitively, to reduce a
function application, we first reduce its left-hand side until it
becomes a literal function; then we reduce its right-hand
side (the argument) until it is also a value; and finally we
substitute the argument for the bound variable in the body of the
function. This last rule, written informally as
(\x:T.t12) v2 ==> [x:=v2]t12
is traditionally called "beta-reduction". *)
(**
value v2
---------------------------- (ST_AppAbs)
(\x:T.t12) v2 ==> [x:=v2]t12
t1 ==> t1'
---------------- (ST_App1)
t1 t2 ==> t1' t2
value v1
t2 ==> t2'
---------------- (ST_App2)
v1 t2 ==> v1 t2'
*)
(** ... plus the usual rules for booleans:
-------------------------------- (ST_IfTrue)
(if true then t1 else t2) ==> t1
--------------------------------- (ST_IfFalse)
(if false then t1 else t2) ==> t2
t1 ==> t1'
---------------------------------------------------- (ST_If)
(if t1 then t2 else t3) ==> (if t1' then t2 else t3)
*)
Reserved Notation "t1 '==>' t2" (at level 40).
Inductive step : tm -> tm -> Prop :=
| ST_AppAbs : forall x T t12 v2,
value v2 ->
(tapp (tabs x T t12) v2) ==> [x:=v2]t12
| ST_App1 : forall t1 t1' t2,
t1 ==> t1' ->
tapp t1 t2 ==> tapp t1' t2
| ST_App2 : forall v1 t2 t2',
value v1 ->
t2 ==> t2' ->
tapp v1 t2 ==> tapp v1 t2'
| ST_IfTrue : forall t1 t2,
(tif ttrue t1 t2) ==> t1
| ST_IfFalse : forall t1 t2,
(tif tfalse t1 t2) ==> t2
| ST_If : forall t1 t1' t2 t3,
t1 ==> t1' ->
(tif t1 t2 t3) ==> (tif t1' t2 t3)
where "t1 '==>' t2" := (step t1 t2).
Hint Constructors step.
Notation multistep := (multi step).
Notation "t1 '==>*' t2" := (multistep t1 t2) (at level 40).
(* ##################################### *)
(* ##################################### *)
(** *** Examples *)
(** Example:
((\x:Bool->Bool. x) (\x:Bool. x)) ==>* (\x:Bool. x)
i.e.
(idBB idB) ==>* idB
*)
Lemma step_example1 :
(tapp idBB idB) ==>* idB.
Proof.
eapply multi_step.
apply ST_AppAbs.
apply v_abs.
simpl.
apply multi_refl. Qed.
(** Example:
((\x:Bool->Bool. x) ((\x:Bool->Bool. x) (\x:Bool. x)))
==>* (\x:Bool. x)
i.e.
(idBB (idBB idB)) ==>* idB.
*)
Lemma step_example2 :
(tapp idBB (tapp idBB idB)) ==>* idB.
Proof.
eapply multi_step.
apply ST_App2. auto.
apply ST_AppAbs. auto.
eapply multi_step.
apply ST_AppAbs. simpl. auto.
simpl. apply multi_refl. Qed.
(** Example:
((\x:Bool->Bool. x) (\x:Bool. if x then false
else true)) true)
==>* false
i.e.
((idBB notB) ttrue) ==>* tfalse.
*)
Lemma step_example3 :
tapp (tapp idBB notB) ttrue ==>* tfalse.
Proof.
eapply multi_step.
apply ST_App1. apply ST_AppAbs. auto. simpl.
eapply multi_step.
apply ST_AppAbs. auto. simpl.
eapply multi_step.
apply ST_IfTrue. apply multi_refl. Qed.
(** Example:
((\x:Bool -> Bool. x) ((\x:Bool. if x then false
else true) true))
==>* false
i.e.
(idBB (notB ttrue)) ==>* tfalse.
*)
Lemma step_example4 :
tapp idBB (tapp notB ttrue) ==>* tfalse.
Proof.
eapply multi_step.
apply ST_App2. auto.
apply ST_AppAbs. auto. simpl.
eapply multi_step.
apply ST_App2. auto.
apply ST_IfTrue.
eapply multi_step.
apply ST_AppAbs. auto. simpl.
apply multi_refl. Qed.
(** A more automatic proof *)
Lemma step_example1' :
(tapp idBB idB) ==>* idB.
Proof. normalize. Qed.
(** Again, we can use the [normalize] tactic from above to simplify
the proof. *)
Lemma step_example2' :
(tapp idBB (tapp idBB idB)) ==>* idB.
Proof.
normalize.
Qed.
Lemma step_example3' :
tapp (tapp idBB notB) ttrue ==>* tfalse.
Proof. normalize. Qed.
Lemma step_example4' :
tapp idBB (tapp notB ttrue) ==>* tfalse.
Proof. normalize. Qed.
(** **** Exercise: 2 stars (step_example3) *)
(** Try to do this one both with and without [normalize]. *)
Lemma step_example5 :
(tapp (tapp idBBBB idBB) idB)
==>* idB.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.
(* FILL IN HERE *)
(** [] *)
(* ###################################################################### *)
(** ** Typing *)
(* ################################### *)
(** *** Contexts *)
(** _Question_: What is the type of the term "[x y]"?
_Answer_: It depends on the types of [x] and [y]!
I.e., in order to assign a type to a term, we need to know
what assumptions we should make about the types of its free
variables.
This leads us to a three-place "typing judgment", informally
written [Gamma |- t \in T], where [Gamma] is a
"typing context" -- a mapping from variables to their types. *)
(** We hide the definition of partial maps in a module since it is
actually defined in [SfLib]. *)
Module PartialMap.
Definition partial_map (A:Type) := id -> option A.
Definition empty {A:Type} : partial_map A := (fun _ => None).
(** Informally, we'll write [Gamma, x:T] for "extend the partial
function [Gamma] to also map [x] to [T]." Formally, we use the
function [extend] to add a binding to a partial map. *)
Definition extend {A:Type} (Gamma : partial_map A) (x:id) (T : A) :=
fun x' => if eq_id_dec x x' then Some T else Gamma x'.
Lemma extend_eq : forall A (ctxt: partial_map A) x T,
(extend ctxt x T) x = Some T.
Proof.
intros. unfold extend. rewrite eq_id. auto.
Qed.
Lemma extend_neq : forall A (ctxt: partial_map A) x1 T x2,
x2 <> x1 ->
(extend ctxt x2 T) x1 = ctxt x1.
Proof.
intros. unfold extend. rewrite neq_id; auto.
Qed.
End PartialMap.
Definition context := partial_map ty.
(* ################################### *)
(** *** Typing Relation *)
(**
Gamma x = T
-------------- (T_Var)
Gamma |- x \in T
Gamma , x:T11 |- t12 \in T12
---------------------------- (T_Abs)
Gamma |- \x:T11.t12 \in T11->T12
Gamma |- t1 \in T11->T12
Gamma |- t2 \in T11
---------------------- (T_App)
Gamma |- t1 t2 \in T12
-------------------- (T_True)
Gamma |- true \in Bool
--------------------- (T_False)
Gamma |- false \in Bool
Gamma |- t1 \in Bool Gamma |- t2 \in T Gamma |- t3 \in T
-------------------------------------------------------- (T_If)
Gamma |- if t1 then t2 else t3 \in T
We can read the three-place relation [Gamma |- t \in T] as:
"to the term [t] we can assign the type [T] using as types for
the free variables of [t] the ones specified in the context
[Gamma]." *)
Reserved Notation "Gamma '|-' t '\in' T" (at level 40).
Inductive has_type : context -> tm -> ty -> Prop :=
| T_Var : forall Gamma x T,
Gamma x = Some T ->
Gamma |- tvar x \in T
| T_Abs : forall Gamma x T11 T12 t12,
extend Gamma x T11 |- t12 \in T12 ->
Gamma |- tabs x T11 t12 \in TArrow T11 T12
| T_App : forall T11 T12 Gamma t1 t2,
Gamma |- t1 \in TArrow T11 T12 ->
Gamma |- t2 \in T11 ->
Gamma |- tapp t1 t2 \in T12
| T_True : forall Gamma,
Gamma |- ttrue \in TBool
| T_False : forall Gamma,
Gamma |- tfalse \in TBool
| T_If : forall t1 t2 t3 T Gamma,
Gamma |- t1 \in TBool ->
Gamma |- t2 \in T ->
Gamma |- t3 \in T ->
Gamma |- tif t1 t2 t3 \in T
where "Gamma '|-' t '\in' T" := (has_type Gamma t T).
Hint Constructors has_type.
(* ################################### *)
(** *** Examples *)
Example typing_example_1 :
empty |- tabs x TBool (tvar x) \in TArrow TBool TBool.
Proof.
apply T_Abs. apply T_Var. reflexivity. Qed.
(** Note that since we added the [has_type] constructors to the hints
database, auto can actually solve this one immediately. *)
Example typing_example_1' :
empty |- tabs x TBool (tvar x) \in TArrow TBool TBool.
Proof. auto. Qed.
(** Another example:
empty |- \x:A. \y:A->A. y (y x))
\in A -> (A->A) -> A.
*)
Example typing_example_2 :
empty |-
(tabs x TBool
(tabs y (TArrow TBool TBool)
(tapp (tvar y) (tapp (tvar y) (tvar x))))) \in
(TArrow TBool (TArrow (TArrow TBool TBool) TBool)).
Proof with auto using extend_eq.
apply T_Abs.
apply T_Abs.
eapply T_App. apply T_Var...
eapply T_App. apply T_Var...
apply T_Var...
Qed.
(** **** Exercise: 2 stars, optional (typing_example_2_full) *)
(** Prove the same result without using [auto], [eauto], or
[eapply]. *)
Example typing_example_2_full :
empty |-
(tabs x TBool
(tabs y (TArrow TBool TBool)
(tapp (tvar y) (tapp (tvar y) (tvar x))))) \in
(TArrow TBool (TArrow (TArrow TBool TBool) TBool)).
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.
(** [] *)
(** **** Exercise: 2 stars (typing_example_3) *)
(** Formally prove the following typing derivation holds: *)
(**
empty |- \x:Bool->B. \y:Bool->Bool. \z:Bool.
y (x z)
\in T.
*)
Example typing_example_3 :
exists T,
empty |-
(tabs x (TArrow TBool TBool)
(tabs y (TArrow TBool TBool)
(tabs z TBool
(tapp (tvar y) (tapp (tvar x) (tvar z)))))) \in
T.
Proof with auto.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.
(** [] *)
(** We can also show that terms are _not_ typable. For example, let's
formally check that there is no typing derivation assigning a type
to the term [\x:Bool. \y:Bool, x y] -- i.e.,
~ exists T,
empty |- \x:Bool. \y:Bool, x y : T.
*)
Example typing_nonexample_1 :
~ exists T,
empty |-
(tabs x TBool
(tabs y TBool
(tapp (tvar x) (tvar y)))) \in
T.
Proof.
intros Hc. inversion Hc.
(* The [clear] tactic is useful here for tidying away bits of
the context that we're not going to need again. *)
inversion H. subst. clear H.
inversion H5. subst. clear H5.
inversion H4. subst. clear H4.
inversion H2. subst. clear H2.
inversion H5. subst. clear H5.
(* rewrite extend_neq in H1. rewrite extend_eq in H1. *)
inversion H1. Qed.
(** **** Exercise: 3 stars, optional (typing_nonexample_3) *)
(** Another nonexample:
~ (exists S, exists T,
empty |- \x:S. x x : T).
*)
Example typing_nonexample_3 :
~ (exists S, exists T,
empty |-
(tabs x S
(tapp (tvar x) (tvar x))) \in
T).
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.
(** [] *)
End STLC.
(** $Date$ *)