Bringing the benefits of gradual typing to a language with parametric polymorphism like System F, while preserving relational parametricity, has proven extremely challenging: first attempts were formulated a decade ago, and several designs have been recently proposed, with varying syntax, behavior, and properties. Starting from a detailed review of the challenges and tensions that affect the design of gradual parametric languages, this work presents an extensive account of the semantics and metatheory of GSF, a gradual counterpart of System F. In doing so, we also report on the extent to which the Abstracting Gradual Typing methodology can help us derive such a language. Among gradual parametric languages that follow the syntax of System F, GSF achieves a unique combination of properties. We clearly establish the benefits and limitations of the language, and discuss several extensions of GSF towards a practical programming language.

Graduality and parametricity have proven to be extremely challenging notions to bring together. Intuitively, enforcing parametricity gradually requires possibly sealing values in order to detect violations of uniform behavior. Toro et al. (2019) argue that the two notions are incompatible in the context of System F, where sealing is transparently driven by potentially imprecise type information, while New et al. (2020) reconcile both properties at the cost of abandoning the syntax of System F and requiring user-provided sealing annotations that are not subject to graduality guarantees. Furthermore, all current proposals rely on a global form of dynamic sealing in order to enforce parametric behavior at runtime, which weakens parametric reasoning and breaks equivalences in the static language. Based on the observation that the tension between graduality and parametricity comes from the early commitment to seal values based on type information, we propose plausible sealing as a new intermediate language mechanism that allows postponing such decisions to runtime. We propose an intermediate language for gradual parametricity, Funky, which supports plausible sealing in a simplified setting where polymorphism is restricted to instantiations with base and variable types. We prove that Funky satisfies both parametricity and graduality, mechanizing key lemmas in Agda. Additionally, we avoid global dynamic sealing and instead propose a novel lexically-scoped form of sealing realized using a representation of evidence inspired by the category of spans. As a consequence, Funky satisfies a standard formulation of parametricity that does not break System F equivalences. In order to show the practicality of plausible sealing, we describe a translation from Funk, a source language without explicit sealing, to Funky, that takes care of inserting plausible sealing forms. We establish graduality of Funk, subject to a restriction on type applications, and explain the source-level parametric reasoning it supports. Finally, we provide an interactive prototype along with illustrative examples both novel and from the literature.

Bringing the benefits of gradual typing to a language with parametric polymorphism like System F, while preserving relational parametricity, has proven extremely challenging: first attempts were formulated a decade ago, and several designs were recently proposed. Among other issues, these proposals can however signal parametricity errors in unexpected situations, and improperly handle type instantiations when imprecise types are involved. These observations further suggest that existing polymorphic cast calculi are not well suited for supporting a gradual counterpart of System F. Consequently, we revisit the challenge of designing a gradual language with explicit parametric polymorphism, exploring the extent to which the Abstracting Gradual Typing methodology helps us derive such a language, GSF. We present the design and metatheory of GSF, and provide a reference implementation. In addition to avoiding the uncovered semantic issues, GSF satisfies all the expected properties of a gradual parametric language, save for one property: the dynamic gradual guarantee, which was left as conjecture in all prior work, is here proven to be simply incompatible with parametricity. We nevertheless establish a weaker property that allows us to disprove several claims about gradual free theorems, clarifying the kind of reasoning supported by gradual parametricity.