Text editing is powerful, but some types of expressions are more naturally represented and manipulated graphically. Examples include expressions that compute colors, music, animations, tabular data, plots, diagrams, and other domain-specific data structures. This paper introduces live literals, or livelits, which allow clients to fill holes of types like these by directly manipulating a user-defined GUI embedded persistently into code. Uniquely, livelits are compositional: a livelit GUI can itself embed spliced expressions, which are typed, lexically scoped, and can in turn embed other livelits. Livelits are also uniquely live: a livelit can provide continuous feedback about the run-time implications of the client’s choices even when splices mention bound variables, because the system continuously gathers closures associated with the hole that the livelit is filling. We integrate livelits into Hazel, a live hole-driven programming environment, and describe case studies that exercise these novel capabilities. We then define a simply typed livelit calculus, which specifies how livelits operate as live graphical macros. The metatheory of macro expansion has been mechanized in Agda.

We present a system called Smyth for program sketching in a typed functional language whereby the concrete evaluation of ordinary assertions gives rise to input-output examples, which are then used to guide the search to complete the holes. The key innovation, called live bidirectional evaluation, propagates examples "backward" through partially evaluated sketches. Live bidirectional evaluation enables Smyth to (a) synthesize recursive functions without trace-complete sets of examples and (b) specify and solve interdependent synthesis goals. Eliminating the trace-completeness requirement resolves a significant limitation faced by prior synthesis techniques when given partial specifications in the form of input-output examples. To assess the practical implications of our techniques, we ran several experiments on benchmarks used to evaluate Myth, a state-of-the-art example-based synthesis tool. First, given expert examples (and no partial implementations), we find that Smyth requires on average 66% of the number of expert examples required by Myth. Second, we find that Smyth is robust to randomly-generated examples, synthesizing many tasks with relatively few more random examples than those provided by an expert. Third, we create a suite of small sketching tasks by systematically employing a simple sketching strategy to the Myth benchmarks; we find that user-provided sketches in Smyth often further reduce the total specification burden (i.e. the combination of partial implementations and examples). Lastly, we find that Leon and Synquid, two state-of-the-art logic-based synthesis tools, fail to complete several tasks on which Smyth succeeds.

Improving game design is a hard task. Few methods are available in games user research (GUR) to test formally how game designs work for players. In particular, the usefulness of user tests (UTs) for game designers has not been fully studied in the CHI community. We propose a novel GUR method called Biometric Storyboards (BioSt) and present a study demonstrating how a Classic UT and a BioSt UT both help designers create a better gameplay experience. In addition, we show that BioSt can help designers deliver significantly better visuals, more fun, and higher gameplay quality than designing without UTs and that classic UTs do not provide this significant advantage. Our interviews support the idea that BioSt provides more nuanced game design improvement. The design implication is that a game designed with the BioSt method will result in high gameplay quality.