Lazy evaluation is a powerful tool that enables better compositionality and potentially better performance in functional programming, but it is challenging to analyze its computation cost. Existing works either require manually annotating sharing, or rely on separation logic to reason about heaps of mutable cells. In this paper, we propose a bidirectional demand semantics that allows for extrinsic reasoning about the computation cost of lazy programs without relying on special program logics. To show the effectiveness of our approach, we apply the demand semantics to a variety of case studies including insertion sort, selection sort, Okasaki’s banker’s queue, and the implicit queue. We formally prove that the banker’s queue and the implicit queue are both amortized and persistent using the Rocq Prover (formerly known as Coq). We also propose the reverse physicist’s method, a novel variant of the classical physicist’s method, which enables mechanized, modular and compositional reasoning about amortization and persistence with the demand semantics.

Transactional objects combine the performance of classical concurrent objects with the high-level programmability of transactional memory. However, verifying the correctness of transactional objects is tricky, requiring reasoning simultaneously about classical concurrent objects, which guarantee the atomicity of individual methods—the property known as linearizability—and about software-transactional-memory libraries, which guarantee the atomicity of user-defined sequences of method calls—or serializability. We present a formal-verification framework called C4, built up from the familiar notion of linearizability and its compositional properties, that allows proof of both kinds of libraries, along with composition of theorems from both styles to prove correctness of applications or further libraries. We apply the framework in a significant case study, verifying a transactional set object built out of both classical and transactional components following the technique of transactional predication ; the proof is modular, reasoning separately about the transactional and nontransactional parts of the implementation. Central to our approach is the use of syntactic transformers on interaction trees —i.e., transactional libraries that transform client code to enforce particular synchronization disciplines. Our framework and case studies are mechanized in Coq.

We present a networked key-value server, implemented in C and formally verified in Coq. The server interacts with clients using a subset of the HTTP/1.1 protocol and is specified and verified using interaction trees and the Verified Software Toolchain. The codebase includes a reusable and fully verified C string library that provides 17 standard POSIX string functions and 17 general purpose non-POSIX string functions. For the KVServer socket system calls, we establish a refinement relation between specifications at user-space level and at CertiKOS kernel-space level.

Lazy evaluation is a powerful tool for functional programmers. It enables the concise expression of on-demand computation and a form of compositionality not available under other evaluation strategies. However, the stateful nature of lazy evaluation makes it hard to analyze a program's computational cost, either informally or formally. In this work, we present a novel and simple framework for formally reasoning about lazy computation costs based on a recent model of lazy evaluation: clairvoyant call-by-value. The key feature of our framework is its simplicity, as expressed by our definition of the clairvoyance monad. This monad is both simple to define (around 20 lines of Coq) and simple to reason about. We show that this monad can be effectively used to mechanically reason about the computational cost of lazy functional programs written in Coq.

Interaction trees (ITrees) are a general-purpose data structure for representing the behaviors of recursive programs that interact with their environments. A coinductive variant of “free monads,” ITrees are built out of uninterpreted events and their continuations. They support compositional construction of interpreters from event handlers , which give meaning to events by defining their semantics as monadic actions. ITrees are expressive enough to represent impure and potentially nonterminating, mutually recursive computations, while admitting a rich equational theory of equivalence up to weak bisimulation. In contrast to other approaches such as relationally specified operational semantics, ITrees are executable via code extraction, making them suitable for debugging, testing, and implementing software artifacts that are amenable to formal verification. We have implemented ITrees and their associated theory as a Coq library, mechanizing classic domain- and category-theoretic results about program semantics, iteration, monadic structures, and equational reasoning. Although the internals of the library rely heavily on coinductive proofs, the interface hides these details so that clients can use and reason about ITrees without explicit use of Coq’s coinduction tactics. To showcase the utility of our theory, we prove the termination-sensitive correctness of a compiler from a simple imperative source language to an assembly-like target whose meanings are given in an ITree-based denotational semantics. Unlike previous results using operational techniques, our bisimulation proof follows straightforwardly by structural induction and elementary rewriting via an equational theory of combinators for control-flow graphs.

We present the first formal verification of a networked server implemented in C. Interaction trees, a general structure for representing reactive computations, are used to tie together disparate verification and testing tools (Coq, VST, and QuickChick) and to axiomatize the behavior of the operating system on which the server runs (CertiKOS). The main theorem connects a specification of acceptable server behaviors, written in a straightforward “one client at a time” style, with the CompCert semantics of the C program. The variability introduced by low-level buffering of messages and interleaving of multiple TCP connections is captured using network refinement, a variant of observational refinement.

Software frequently converts data from one representation to another and vice versa. Naïvely specifying both conversion directions separately is error prone and introduces conceptual duplication. Instead, bidirectional programming techniques allow programs to be written which can be interpreted in both directions. However, these techniques often employ unfamiliar programming idioms via restricted, specialised combinator libraries. Instead, we introduce a framework for composing bidirectional programs monadically, enabling bidirectional programming with familiar abstractions in functional languages such as Haskell. We demonstrate the generality of our approach applied to parsers/printers, lenses, and generators/predicates. We show how to leverage compositionality and equational reasoning for the verification of round-tripping properties for such monadic bidirectional programs.

Property-based random testing à la QuickCheck requires building efficient generators for well-distributed random data satisfying complex logical predicates, but writing these generators can be difficult and error prone. We propose a domain-specific language in which generators are conveniently expressed by decorating predicates with lightweight annotations to control both the distribution of generated values and the amount of constraint solving that happens before each variable is instantiated. This language, called Luck, makes generators easier to write, read, and maintain.