A type system for certified binaries

Shao, Zhong; SahaBratin,; TrifonovValery,; PapaspyrouNikolaos,

doi:10.1145/565816.503293

Cited by 10 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 36 publications

(78 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The need for validating program analyzers was discussed by [8], and the topic has motivated interesting research over the past years. On the formal verification side, there have been some pen-and-paper proofs, such as that of the Astree analyzer [12], some automatic and interactive proofs, such as [16,44], and some verification efforts, which include [2,26,31]. Testing efforts for program analyzers include e.g., static analyzers [13,28,49,52], symbolic execution engines [27], refactoring engines [14], compilers [29,30,32,43,47,50], SMT solvers [3], among others.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing Your (Static Analysis) Truths

Casso

Morales

López-García

et al. 2021

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Static analysis is nowadays an essential component of many software development toolsets. Despite some notorious successes in the validation of compilers, comparatively little work exists on the systematic validation of static analyzers, whose correctness and reliability is critical if they are to be inserted in production environments. Contributing factors may be the intrinsic difficulty of formally verifying code that is quite complex and of finding suitable oracles for testing it. In this paper, we propose a simple, automatic method for testing abstract interpretationbased static analyzers. Broadly, it consists in checking, over a suite of benchmarks, that the properties inferred statically are satisfied dynamically. The main advantage of our approach is its simplicity, which stems directly from framing it within the Ciao assertion-based validation framework, and its blended static/dynamic assertion checking approach. We show that in this setting, the analysis can be tested with little effort by combining the following components already present in the framework: the static analyzer, the assertion run-time checking mechanism, the random test case generator, and the unit-test framework . Together they compose a tool that can effectively discover and locate errors in the different components of the analysis framework. We apply our approach to test some of CiaoPP's analysis domains over a wide range of programs, successfully finding non-trivial, previously undetected bugs, with a low degree of effort.logic programming Partially funded by MICINN PID2019-108528RB-C21 ProCode and the Madrid P2018/TCS-4339 BLOQUES-CM program.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing Your (Static Analysis) Truths

Casso

Morales

López-García

et al. 2021

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

An Introduction to Dependent Type Theory

Barthe

Coquand

2002

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Dependently Typed Multi-stage Calculus

Kawata

Igarashi

2019

Programming Languages and Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study a dependently typed extension of a multi-stage programming languageà la MetaOCaml, which supports quasi-quotation and cross-stage persistence for manipulation of code fragments as firstclass values and an evaluation construct for execution of programs dynamically generated by this code manipulation. Dependent types are expected to bring to multi-stage programming enforcement of strong invariant-beyond simple type safety-on the behavior of dynamically generated code. An extension is, however, not trivial because such a type system would have to take stages of types-roughly speaking, the number of surrounding quotations-into account. To rigorously study properties of such an extension, we develop λ MD , which is an extension of Hanada and Igarashi's typed calculus λ ⊲% with dependent types, and prove its properties including preservation, confluence, strong normalization for full reduction, and progress for staged reduction. Motivated by code generators that generate code whose type depends on a value from outside of the quotations, we argue the significance of cross-stage persistence in dependently typed multi-stage programming and certain type equivalences that are not directly derived from reduction rules. A. Kawata, A. Igarashi B ProofsJ is a metavariable for judgments as in Section 4. We say type environment Γ is a subsequence of type environment ∆ if and only if we can get Γ from ∆ by deleting some or no variables without changing the order of the remaining elements.Lemma 4 (Weakening). If Γ ⊢ Σ J @A and Γ is a subsequence of ∆, then ∆ ⊢ Σ J@A.Proof. By straightforward induction on the derivation of typing, kinding, wellformed kinding, term equivalence, type equivalence or kind equivalence. We show only representative cases.

show abstract

A type system for certified binaries

Cited by 10 publications

References 36 publications

Testing Your (Static Analysis) Truths

Testing Your (Static Analysis) Truths

An Introduction to Dependent Type Theory

A Dependently Typed Multi-stage Calculus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About