[PLT] Type safety

灰色區域:well behaved
紅色區域:ill behaved

如果所有程序都是灰的,strongly typed
如果存在紅色的程序,weakly typed

編譯時排除紅色程序,statically typed
運行時排除紅色程序,dynamically typed

所有程序都在黃框以外,type safe


A program variable can assume a range of values during the execution of a program. An upper bound of such a range is called a type of the variable.

Languages where variables can be given (nontrivial) types are called typed languages.

Languages that do not restrict the range of variables are called untyped languages: they do not have types or, equivalently, have a single universal type that contains all values.

A type system is that component of a typed language that keeps track of the types of variables and, in general, of the types of all expressions in a program.

A language is typed by virtue of the existence of a type system for it, whether or not types actually appear in the syntax of programs. Typed languages are explicitly typed if types are part of the syntax, and implicitly typed otherwise.

It is useful to distinguish between two kinds of execution errors: the ones that cause the computation to stop immediately, and the ones that go unnoticed (for a while) and later cause arbitrary behavior. The former are called trapped errors, whereas the latter are untrapped errors.

An example of an untrapped error is improperly accessing a legal address, for example, accessing data past the end of an array in absence of run time bounds checks. Another untrapped error that may go unnoticed for an arbitrary length of time is jumping to the wrong address: memory there may or may not represent an instruction stream.

Examples of trapped errors are division by zero and accessing an illegal address: the computation stops immediately (on many computer architectures).

A program fragment is safe if it does not cause untrapped errors to occur. Languages where all program fragments are safe are called safe languages.

Therefore, safe languages rule out the most insidious form of execution errors: the ones that may go unnoticed.

Untyped languages may enforce safety by performing run time checks. Typed languages may enforce safety by statically rejecting all programs that are potentially unsafe. Typed languages may also use a mixture of run time and static checks.

Typed languages usually aim to rule out also large classes of trapped errors, along with the untrapped ones.

For any given language, we may designate a subset of the possible execution errors as forbidden errors. The forbidden errors should include all of the untrapped errors, plus a subset of the trapped errors.

A program fragment is said to have good behavior, or equivalently to be well behaved, if it does not cause any forbidden error to occur.

In particular, a well behaved fragment is safe.

A language where all of the (legal) programs have good behavior is called strongly checked.

Thus, with respect to a given type system, the following holds for a strongly checked language:
(1) No untrapped errors occur (safety guarantee).
(2) None of the trapped errors designated as forbidden errors occur.
(3) Other trapped errors may occur; it is the programmer’s responsibility to avoid them.

Typed languages can enforce good behavior (including safety) by performing static (i.e., compile time) checks to prevent unsafe and ill behaved programs from ever running. These languages are statically checked; the checking process is called typechecking, and the algorithm that performs this checking is called the typechecker. A program that passes the typechecker is said to be well typed; otherwise, it is ill typed, which may mean that it is actually ill-behaved, or simply that it could not be guaranteed to be well behaved.

Untyped languages can enforce good behavior (including safety) in a different way, by performing sufficiently detailed run time checks to rule out all forbidden errors. (For example, they may check all array bounds, and all division operations, generating recoverable exceptions when forbidden errors would happen.) The checking process in these languages is called dynamic checking; LISP is an example of such a language. These languages are strongly checked even though they have neither static checking, nor a type system.

Even statically checked languages usually need to perform tests at run time to achieve safety. For example, array bounds must in general be tested dynamically. The fact that a language is statically checked does not necessarily mean that execution can proceed entirely blindly.

By our definitions, a well behaved program is safe. Safety is a more primitive and perhaps more important property than good behavior. The primary goal of a type system is to ensure language safety by ruling out all untrapped errors in all program runs. However, most type systems are designed to ensure the more general good behavior property, and implicitly safety. Thus, the declared goal of a type system is usually to ensure good behavior of all programs, by distinguishing between well typed and ill typed programs.

In reality, certain statically checked languages do not ensure safety. That is, their set of forbidden errors does not include all untrapped errors. These languages can be euphemistically called weakly checked (or weakly typed, in the literature) meaning that some unsafe operations are detected statically and some are not detected.

        Type      UnTyped
Safe    ML,Java   LISP
UnSafe  C         Assembler

Formal type systems are the mathematical characterizations of the informal type systems that are described in programming language manuals. Once a type system is formalized, we can attempt to prove a type soundness theorem stating that well-typed programs are well behaved. If such a soundness theorem holds, we say that the type system is sound. (Good behavior of all programs of a typed language and soundness of its type system mean the same thing.)

In this chapter we discuss type systems independently of semantics. It should be understood, though, that ultimately a type system must be related to a semantics, and that soundness should hold for that semantics.


參考:
Type Systems: Luca Cardelli

最后編輯于
?著作權歸作者所有,轉載或內容合作請聯系作者
平臺聲明:文章內容(如有圖片或視頻亦包括在內)由作者上傳并發布,文章內容僅代表作者本人觀點,簡書系信息發布平臺,僅提供信息存儲服務。
  • 序言:七十年代末,一起剝皮案震驚了整個濱河市,隨后出現的幾起案子,更是在濱河造成了極大的恐慌,老刑警劉巖,帶你破解...
    沈念sama閱讀 230,106評論 6 542
  • 序言:濱河連續發生了三起死亡事件,死亡現場離奇詭異,居然都是意外死亡,警方通過查閱死者的電腦和手機,發現死者居然都...
    沈念sama閱讀 99,441評論 3 429
  • 文/潘曉璐 我一進店門,熙熙樓的掌柜王于貴愁眉苦臉地迎上來,“玉大人,你說我怎么就攤上這事。” “怎么了?”我有些...
    開封第一講書人閱讀 178,211評論 0 383
  • 文/不壞的土叔 我叫張陵,是天一觀的道長。 經常有香客問我,道長,這世上最難降的妖魔是什么? 我笑而不...
    開封第一講書人閱讀 63,736評論 1 317
  • 正文 為了忘掉前任,我火速辦了婚禮,結果婚禮上,老公的妹妹穿的比我還像新娘。我一直安慰自己,他們只是感情好,可當我...
    茶點故事閱讀 72,475評論 6 412
  • 文/花漫 我一把揭開白布。 她就那樣靜靜地躺著,像睡著了一般。 火紅的嫁衣襯著肌膚如雪。 梳的紋絲不亂的頭發上,一...
    開封第一講書人閱讀 55,834評論 1 328
  • 那天,我揣著相機與錄音,去河邊找鬼。 笑死,一個胖子當著我的面吹牛,可吹牛的內容都是我干的。 我是一名探鬼主播,決...
    沈念sama閱讀 43,829評論 3 446
  • 文/蒼蘭香墨 我猛地睜開眼,長吁一口氣:“原來是場噩夢啊……” “哼!你這毒婦竟也來了?” 一聲冷哼從身側響起,我...
    開封第一講書人閱讀 43,009評論 0 290
  • 序言:老撾萬榮一對情侶失蹤,失蹤者是張志新(化名)和其女友劉穎,沒想到半個月后,有當地人在樹林里發現了一具尸體,經...
    沈念sama閱讀 49,559評論 1 335
  • 正文 獨居荒郊野嶺守林人離奇死亡,尸身上長有42處帶血的膿包…… 初始之章·張勛 以下內容為張勛視角 年9月15日...
    茶點故事閱讀 41,306評論 3 358
  • 正文 我和宋清朗相戀三年,在試婚紗的時候發現自己被綠了。 大學時的朋友給我發了我未婚夫和他白月光在一起吃飯的照片。...
    茶點故事閱讀 43,516評論 1 374
  • 序言:一個原本活蹦亂跳的男人離奇死亡,死狀恐怖,靈堂內的尸體忽然破棺而出,到底是詐尸還是另有隱情,我是刑警寧澤,帶...
    沈念sama閱讀 39,038評論 5 363
  • 正文 年R本政府宣布,位于F島的核電站,受9級特大地震影響,放射性物質發生泄漏。R本人自食惡果不足惜,卻給世界環境...
    茶點故事閱讀 44,728評論 3 348
  • 文/蒙蒙 一、第九天 我趴在偏房一處隱蔽的房頂上張望。 院中可真熱鬧,春花似錦、人聲如沸。這莊子的主人今日做“春日...
    開封第一講書人閱讀 35,132評論 0 28
  • 文/蒼蘭香墨 我抬頭看了看天上的太陽。三九已至,卻和暖如春,著一層夾襖步出監牢的瞬間,已是汗流浹背。 一陣腳步聲響...
    開封第一講書人閱讀 36,443評論 1 295
  • 我被黑心中介騙來泰國打工, 沒想到剛下飛機就差點兒被人妖公主榨干…… 1. 我叫王不留,地道東北人。 一個月前我還...
    沈念sama閱讀 52,249評論 3 399
  • 正文 我出身青樓,卻偏偏與公主長得像,于是被迫代替她去往敵國和親。 傳聞我的和親對象是個殘疾皇子,可洞房花燭夜當晚...
    茶點故事閱讀 48,484評論 2 379

推薦閱讀更多精彩內容