Start LambdaCalculusAndTypeSoundness: automated soundness proof

LambdaCalculusAndTypeSoundness.v

@@ -0,0 +1,242 @@
+(** Formal Reasoning About Programs <http://adam.chlipala.net/frap/>
+  * Chapter 8: Lambda Calculus and Simple Type Soundness
+  * Author: Adam Chlipala
+  * License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ *)
+
+Require Import Frap.
+
+(* Expression syntax *)
+Inductive exp : Set :=
+| Var (x : var)
+| Const (n : nat)
+| Plus (e1 e2 : exp)
+| Abs (x : var) (e1 : exp)
+| App (e1 e2 : exp).
+
+(* Values (final results of evaluation) *)
+Inductive value : exp -> Prop :=
+| VConst : forall n, value (Const n)
+| VAbs : forall x e1, value (Abs x e1).
+
+(* Substitution (not applicable when [e1] isn't closed, to avoid some complexity
+ * that we don't need) *)
+Fixpoint subst (e1 : exp) (x : string) (e2 : exp) : exp :=
+  match e2 with
+    | Var y => if y ==v x then e1 else Var y
+    | Const n => Const n
+    | Plus e2' e2'' => Plus (subst e1 x e2') (subst e1 x e2'')
+    | Abs y e2' => Abs y (if y ==v x then e2' else subst e1 x e2')
+    | App e2' e2'' => App (subst e1 x e2') (subst e1 x e2'')
+  end.
+
+(* Evaluation contexts *)
+Inductive context : Set :=
+| Hole : context
+| Plus1 : context -> exp -> context
+| Plus2 : exp -> context -> context
+| App1 : context -> exp -> context
+| App2 : exp -> context -> context.
+
+(* Plugging an expression into a context *)
+Inductive plug : context -> exp -> exp -> Prop :=
+| PlugHole : forall e, plug Hole e e
+| PlugPlus1 : forall e e' C e2,
+  plug C e e'
+  -> plug (Plus1 C e2) e (Plus e' e2)
+| PlugPlus2 : forall e e' v1 C,
+  value v1
+  -> plug C e e'
+  -> plug (Plus2 v1 C) e (Plus v1 e')
+| PlugApp1 : forall e e' C e2,
+  plug C e e'
+  -> plug (App1 C e2) e (App e' e2)
+| PlugApp2 : forall e e' v1 C,
+  value v1
+  -> plug C e e'
+  -> plug (App2 v1 C) e (App v1 e').
+
+(* Small-step, call-by-value evaluation, using our evaluation contexts *)
+
+(* First: the primitive reductions *)
+Inductive step0 : exp -> exp -> Prop :=
+| Beta : forall x e v,
+  value v
+  -> step0 (App (Abs x e) v) (subst v x e)
+| Add : forall n1 n2,
+  step0 (Plus (Const n1) (Const n2)) (Const (n1 + n2)).
+
+(* Then: running them in context *)
+Inductive step : exp -> exp -> Prop :=
+| StepRule : forall C e1 e2 e1' e2',
+  plug C e1 e1'
+  -> plug C e2 e2'
+  -> step0 e1 e2
+  -> step e1' e2'.
+
+(* It's easy to wrap everything as a transition system. *)
+Definition trsys_of (e : exp) := {|
+  Initial := {e};
+  Step := step
+|}.
+
+
+(* Syntax of types *)
+Inductive type : Set :=
+| Nat
+| Fun (dom ran : type).
+
+(* Our typing judgment uses *typing contexts* (not to be confused with
+ * evaluation contexts) to map free variables to their types. *)
+Inductive hasty : fmap var type -> exp -> type -> Prop :=
+| HtVar : forall G x t,
+  G $? x = Some t
+  -> hasty G (Var x) t
+| HtConst : forall G n,
+  hasty G (Const n) Nat
+| HtPlus : forall G e1 e2,
+  hasty G e1 Nat
+  -> hasty G e2 Nat
+  -> hasty G (Plus e1 e2) Nat
+| HtAbs : forall G x e1 t1 t2,
+  hasty (G $+ (x, t1)) e1 t2
+  -> hasty G (Abs x e1) (Fun t1 t2)
+| HtApp : forall G e1 e2 t1 t2,
+  hasty G e1 (Fun t1 t2)
+  -> hasty G e2 t1
+  -> hasty G (App e1 e2) t2.
+
+Hint Constructors value plug step0 step hasty.
+
+(* Some automation *)
+
+Ltac t0 := match goal with
+           | [ H : ex _ |- _ ] => destruct H
+           | [ H : _ /\ _ |- _ ] => destruct H
+           | [ |- context[?x ==v ?y] ] => destruct (x ==v y)
+           | [ H : Some _ = Some _ |- _ ] => invert H
+
+           | [ H : step _ _ |- _ ] => invert H
+           | [ H : step0 _ _ |- _ ] => invert1 H
+           | [ H : hasty _ ?e _, H' : value ?e |- _ ] => invert H'; invert H
+           | [ H : hasty _ _ _ |- _ ] => invert1 H
+           | [ H : plug _ _ _ |- _ ] => invert1 H
+           end; subst.
+
+Ltac t := simplify; propositional; repeat (t0; simplify); try congruence; eauto 6.
+
+(* Now we're ready for the first of the two key properties, to show that "has
+ * type t in the empty typing context" is an invariant. *)
+Lemma progress : forall e t,
+  hasty $0 e t
+  -> value e
+  \/ (exists e' : exp, step e e').
+Proof.
+  induct 1; t.
+Qed.
+
+(* Inclusion between typing contexts is preserved by adding the same new mapping
+ * to both. *)
+Lemma weakening_override : forall (G G' : fmap var type) x t,
+  (forall x' t', G $? x' = Some t' -> G' $? x' = Some t')
+  -> (forall x' t', G $+ (x, t) $? x' = Some t'
+                    -> G' $+ (x, t) $? x' = Some t').
+Proof.
+  simplify.
+  cases (x ==v x'); simplify; eauto.
+Qed.
+
+Hint Resolve weakening_override.
+
+(** Raising a typing derivation to a larger typing context *)
+Lemma weakening : forall G e t,
+  hasty G e t
+  -> forall G', (forall x t, G $? x = Some t -> G' $? x = Some t)
+    -> hasty G' e t.
+Proof.
+  induct 1; t.
+Qed.
+
+Hint Resolve weakening.
+
+(* Replacing a typing context with an equal one has no effect (useful to guide
+ * proof search). *)
+Lemma hasty_change : forall G e t,
+  hasty G e t
+  -> forall G', G' = G
+    -> hasty G' e t.
+Proof.
+  t.
+Qed.
+
+Hint Resolve hasty_change.
+
+(* Replacing a variable with a properly typed term preserves typing. *)
+Lemma substitution : forall G x t' e t e',
+  hasty (G $+ (x, t')) e t
+  -> hasty $0 e' t'
+  -> hasty G (subst e' x e) t.
+Proof.
+  induct 1; t.
+Qed.
+
+Hint Resolve substitution.
+
+(* We're almost ready for the main preservation property.  Let's prove it first
+ * for the more basic [step0] relation. *)
+Lemma preservation0 : forall e1 e2,
+  step0 e1 e2
+  -> forall t, hasty $0 e1 t
+    -> hasty $0 e2 t.
+Proof.
+  invert 1; t.
+Qed.
+
+Hint Resolve preservation0.
+
+(* We also need this key property, essentially saying that, if [e1] and [e2] are
+ * "type-equivalent," then they remain "type-equivalent" after wrapping the same
+ * context around both. *)
+Lemma generalize_plug : forall e1 C e1',
+  plug C e1 e1'
+  -> forall e2 e2', plug C e2 e2'
+    -> (forall t, hasty $0 e1 t -> hasty $0 e2 t)
+    -> (forall t, hasty $0 e1' t -> hasty $0 e2' t).
+Proof.
+  induct 1; t.
+Qed.
+
+Hint Resolve generalize_plug.
+
+(* OK, now we're out of the woods. *)
+Lemma preservation : forall e1 e2,
+  step e1 e2
+  -> forall t, hasty $0 e1 t
+    -> hasty $0 e2 t.
+Proof.
+  invert 1; t.
+Qed.
+
+Hint Resolve progress preservation.
+
+(* Now watch this!  Though the syntactic approach to type soundness is usually
+ * presented from scratch as a proof technique, it turns out that the two key
+ * properties, progress and preservation, are just instances of the same methods
+ * we've been applying all along with invariants of transition systems! *)
+Theorem safety : forall e t, hasty $0 e t
+  -> invariantFor (trsys_of e)
+                  (fun e' => value e'
+                             \/ exists e'', step e' e'').
+Proof.
+  simplify.
+
+  (* Step 1: strengthen the invariant.  In particular, the typing relation is
+   * exactly the right stronger invariant!  Our progress theorem proves the
+   * required invariant inclusion. *)
+  apply invariant_weaken with (invariant1 := fun e' => hasty $0 e' t); eauto.
+
+  (* Step 2: apply invariant induction, whose induction step turns out to match
+   * our preservation theorem exactly! *)
+  apply invariant_induction; simplify.
+  equality.
+  eauto. (* We use preservation here. *)
+Qed.