System F enhances the simply-typed lambda calculus with abstraction
over types. In order to state System F, we'll need to adopt the
-notational convention that "<code>x:α</code>" represents a
-expression whose type is <code>α</code>.
+notational convention that "<code>x:α</code>" represents an
+expression `x` whose type is <code>α</code>.
Then System F can be specified as follows (choosing notation that will
match up with usage in O'Caml, whose type system is based on System F):
- System F:
+ System F:
+ ---------
types τ ::= c | 'a | τ1 -> τ2 | ∀'a. τ
expressions e ::= x | λx:τ. e | e1 e2 | Λ'a. e | e [τ]
In the definition of the types, "`c`" is a type constant (e.g., `e` or
-`t`). "`'a`" is a type variable (the tick mark just indicates that
-the variable ranges over types rather than values). "`τ1 -> τ2`" is
-the type of a function from expressions of type `τ1` to expressions of
-type `τ2`. And "`∀'a. τ`" is called a universal type, since it
-universally quantifies over the type variable `'a`.
-
-In the definition of the expressions, we have variables "`x`".
+`t`, or in arithmetic contexts, `N` or `Int`). "`'a`" is a type
+variable (the tick mark just indicates that the variable ranges over
+types rather than over values). "`τ1 -> τ2`" is the type of a
+function from expressions of type `τ1` to expressions of type `τ2`.
+And "`∀'a. τ`" is called a universal type, since it universally
+quantifies over the type variable `'a`. (You can expect that in
+`∀'a. τ`, the type `τ` will usually have at least one free occurrence
+of `'a` somewhere inside of it.)
+
+In the definition of the expressions, we have variables "`x`" as usual.
Abstracts "`λx:τ. e`" are similar to abstracts in the simply-typed lambda
calculus, except that they have their shrug variable annotated with a
type. Applications "`e1 e2`" are just like in the simply-typed lambda calculus.
+
In addition to variables, abstracts, and applications, we have two
-additional ways of forming expressions: "`Λ'a. e`" is a type
-abstraction, and "`e [τ]`" is a type application. The idea is that
-<code>Λ</code> is a capital <code>λ</code>. Just like
-the lower-case <code>λ</code>, <code>Λ</code> binds
-variables in its body; unlike <code>λ</code>,
-<code>Λ</code> binds type variables. So in the expression
+additional ways of forming expressions: "`Λ'a. e`" is called a *type
+abstraction*, and "`e [τ]`" is called a *type application*. The idea
+is that <code>Λ</code> is a capital <code>λ</code>: just
+like the lower-case <code>λ</code>, <code>Λ</code> binds
+variables in its body, except that unlike <code>λ</code>,
+<code>Λ</code> binds type variables instead of expression
+variables. So in the expression
<code>Λ 'a (λ x:'a . x)</code>
the <code>Λ</code> binds the type variable `'a` that occurs in
the <code>λ</code> abstract. This expression is a polymorphic
-version of the identity function. It says that this one general
-identity function can be adapted for use with expressions of any
-type. In order to get it ready to apply to, say, a variable of type
-boolean, just do this:
+version of the identity function. It defines one general identity
+function that can be adapted for use with expressions of any type. In order
+to get it ready to apply to, say, a variable of type boolean, just do
+this:
<code>(Λ 'a (λ x:'a . x)) [t]</code>
-The type application (where `t` is a type constant for Boolean truth
-values) specifies the value of the type variable `α`, which is
-the type of the variable bound in the `λ` expression. Not
+This type application (where `t` is a type constant for Boolean truth
+values) specifies the value of the type variable α, which is
+the type of the variable bound in the λ expression. Not
surprisingly, the type of this type application is a function from
Booleans to Booleans:
of type `'a`. In general, then, the type of the unapplied
(polymorphic) identity function is
-<code>(Λ 'a (λ x:'a . x)): (\forall 'a . 'a -> 'a)
-
-
+<code>(Λ 'a (λ x:'a . x)): (∀ 'a . 'a -> 'a)</code>
+Pred in System F
+----------------
-##
+We saw that the predecessor function couldn't be expressed in the
+simply-typed lambda calculus. It can be expressed in System F, however.
+[See Benjamin C. Pierce. 2002. *Types and Programming Languages*, MIT
+Press, pp. 350--353, for `tail` for lists in System F.]
Types in OCaml