Your Favorite Language
Probably has lots of features:
- Assignment (
x = x + 1
) - Booleans, integers, characters, strings, …
- Conditionals
- Loops
return
,break
,continue
- Functions
- Recursion
- References / pointers
- Objects and classes
- Inheritance
- …
Which ones can we do without?
What is the smallest universal language?
What is computable?
Before 1930s
Informal notion of an effectively calculable function:
1936: Formalization
What is the smallest universal language?
The Next 700 Languages
Whatever the next 700 languages turn out to be, they will surely be variants of lambda calculus.
Peter Landin, 1966
The Lambda Calculus
Has one feature:
- Functions
No, really
Assignment (x = x + 1
)Booleans, integers, characters, strings, …ConditionalsLoopsreturn
,break
,continue
- Functions
RecursionReferences / pointersObjects and classesInheritanceReflection
More precisely, only thing you can do is:
- Define a function
- Call a function
Describing a Programming Language
- Syntax: what do programs look like?
- Semantics: what do programs mean?
- Operational semantics: how do programs execute step-by-step?
Syntax: What Programs Look Like
::= x
e | \x -> e
| e1 e2
Programs are expressions e
(also called λ-terms) of one of three kinds:
- Variable
x
,y
,z
- Abstraction (aka nameless function definition)
\x -> e
x
is the formal parameter,e
is the body- “for any
x
computee
”
- Application (aka function call)
e1 e2
e1
is the function,e2
is the argument- in your favorite language:
e1(e2)
(Here each of e
, e1
, e2
can itself be a variable, abstraction, or application)
Examples
-> x -- The identity function (id)
\x -- ("for any x compute x")
-> (\y -> y) -- A function that returns (id)
\x
-> (f (\x -> x)) -- A function that applies its argument to id \f
QUIZ
Which of the following terms are syntactically incorrect?
A. \(\x -> x) -> y
B. \x -> x x
C. \x -> x (y x)
D. A and C
E. all of the above
Examples
-> x -- The identity function
\x -- ("for any x compute x")
-> (\y -> y) -- A function that returns the identity function
\x
-> f (\x -> x) -- A function that applies its argument
\f -- to the identity function
How do I define a function with two arguments?
- e.g. a function that takes
x
andy
and returnsy
?
-> (\y -> y) -- A function that returns the identity function
\x -- OR: a function that takes two arguments
-- and returns the second one!
How do I apply a function to two arguments?
- e.g. apply
\x -> (\y -> y)
toapple
andbanana
?
-> (\y -> y)) apple) banana) -- first apply to apple,
(((\x -- then apply the result to banana
Syntactic Sugar
instead of | we write |
---|---|
\x -> (\y -> (\z -> e)) |
\x -> \y -> \z -> e |
\x -> \y -> \z -> e |
\x y z -> e |
(((e1 e2) e3) e4) |
e1 e2 e3 e4 |
-> y -- A function that that takes two arguments
\x y -- and returns the second one...
-> y) apple banana -- ... applied to two arguments (\x y
Semantics : What Programs Mean
How do I “run” / “execute” a λ-term?
Think of middle-school algebra:
-- Simplify expression:
1 + 2) * ((3 * 8) - 2)
(=
3 * ((3 * 8) - 2)
=
3 * ( 24 - 2)
=
3 * 22
=
66
Execute = rewrite step-by-step
- Following simple rules
- until no more rules apply
Rewrite Rules of Lambda Calculus
- β-step (aka function call)
- α-step (aka renaming formals)
But first we have to talk about scope
Semantics: Scope of a Variable
The part of a program where a variable is visible
In the expression \x -> e
x
is the newly introduced variablee
is the scope ofx
any occurrence of
x
in\x -> e
is bound (by the binder\x
)
For example, x
is bound in:
-> x
\x -> (\y -> x) \x
An occurrence of x
in e
is free if it’s not bound by an enclosing abstraction
For example, x
is free in:
-- no binders at all!
x y -> x y -- no \x binder
\y -> \y -> y) x -- x is outside the scope of the \x binder;
(\x -- intuition: it's not "the same" x
QUIZ
In the expression (\x -> x) x
, is x
bound or free?
A. first occurrence is bound, second is bound
B. first occurrence is bound, second is free
C. first occurrence is free, second is bound
D. first occurrence is free, second is free
EXERCISE: Free Variables
An variable x
is free in e
if there exists a free occurrence of x
in e
We can formally define the set of all free variables in a term like so:
FV(x) = ???
FV(\x -> e) = ???
FV(e1 e2) = ???
Closed Expressions
If e
has no free variables it is said to be closed
- Closed expressions are also called combinators
What is the shortest closed expression?
Rewrite Rules of Lambda Calculus
- β-step (aka function call)
- α-step (aka renaming formals)
Semantics: Redex
A redex is a term of the form
-> e1) e2 (\x
A function (\x -> e1)
x
is the parametere1
is the returned expression
Applied to an argument e2
e2
is the argument
Semantics: β-Reduction
A redex b-steps to another term …
-> e1) e2 =b> e1[x := e2] (\x
where e1[x := e2]
means
“e1
with all free occurrences of x
replaced with e2
”
Computation by search-and-replace:
If you see an abstraction applied to an argument, take the body of the abstraction and replace all free occurrences of the formal by that argument
We say that
(\x -> e1) e2
β-steps toe1[x := e2]
Redex Examples
-> x) apple
(\x =b> apple
Is this right? Ask Elsa!
QUIZ
-> (\y -> y)) apple
(\x =b> ???
A. apple
B. \y -> apple
C. \x -> apple
D. \y -> y
E. \x -> y
QUIZ
-> y x y x) apple
(\x =b> ???
A. apple apple apple apple
B. y apple y apple
C. y y y y
D. apple
QUIZ
-> x (\x -> x)) apple
(\x =b> ???
A. apple (\x -> x)
B. apple (\apple -> apple)
C. apple (\x -> apple)
D. apple
E. \x -> x
EXERCISE
What is a λ-term fill_this_in
such that
fill_this_in apple=b> banana
ELSA: https://goto.ucsd.edu/elsa/index.html
Click here to try this exercise
A Tricky One
-> (\y -> x)) y
(\x =b> \y -> y
Is this right?
Something is Fishy
-> (\y -> x)) y
(\x =b> \y -> y
Is this right?
Problem: The free y
in the argument has been captured by \y
in body!
Solution: Ensure that formals in the body are different from free-variables of argument!
Capture-Avoiding Substitution
We have to fix our definition of β-reduction:
-> e1) e2 =b> e1[x := e2] (\x
where e1[x := e2]
means “e1
with all free occurrences of x
replaced with e2
”
e1
with all free occurrences ofx
replaced withe2
- as long as no free variables of
e2
get captured
Formally:
:= e] = e
x[x
:= e] = y -- as x /= y
y[x
:= e] = (e1[x := e]) (e2[x := e])
(e1 e2)[x
-> e1)[x := e] = \x -> e1 -- Q: Why leave `e1` unchanged?
(\x
-> e1)[x := e]
(\y | not (y in FV(e)) = \y -> e1[x := e]
Oops, but what to do if y
is in the free-variables of e
?
- i.e. if
\y -> ...
may capture those free variables?
Rewrite Rules of Lambda Calculus
- β-step (aka function call)
- α-step (aka renaming formals)
Semantics: α-Renaming
-> e =a> \y -> e[x := y]
\x where not (y in FV(e))
We rename a formal parameter
x
toy
By replace all occurrences of
x
in the body withy
We say that
\x -> e
α-steps to\y -> e[x := y]
Example:
-> x =a> \y -> y =a> \z -> z \x
All these expressions are α-equivalent
What’s wrong with these?
-- (A)
-> f x =a> \x -> x x \f
-- (B)
-> \y -> y) y =a> (\x -> \z -> z) z (\x
Tricky Example Revisited
-> (\y -> x)) y
(\x -- rename 'y' to 'z' to avoid capture
=a> (\x -> (\z -> x)) y
-- now do b-step without capture!
=b> \z -> y
To avoid getting confused,
you can always rename formals,
so different variables have different names!
Normal Forms
Recall redex is a λ-term of the form
(\x -> e1) e2
A λ-term is in normal form if it contains no redexes.
QUIZ
Which of the following term are not in normal form ?
A. x
B. x y
C. (\x -> x) y
D. x (\y -> y)
E. C and D
Semantics: Evaluation
A λ-term e
evaluates to e'
if
- There is a sequence of steps
=?> e_1 =?> ... =?> e_N =?> e' e
where each =?>
is either =a>
or =b>
and N >= 0
e'
is in normal form
Examples of Evaluation
-> x) apple
(\x =b> apple
-> f (\x -> x)) (\x -> x)
(\f =?> ???
-> x x) (\x -> x)
(\x =?> ???
Elsa shortcuts
Named λ-terms:
let ID = \x -> x -- abbreviation for \x -> x
To substitute name with its definition, use a =d>
step:
ID apple
=d> (\x -> x) apple -- expand definition
=b> apple -- beta-reduce
Evaluation:
e1 =*> e2
:e1
reduces toe2
in 0 or more steps- where each step is
=a>
,=b>
, or=d>
- where each step is
e1 =~> e2
:e1
evaluates toe2
ande2
is in normal form
EXERCISE
Fill in the definitions of FIRST
, SECOND
and THIRD
such that you get the following behavior in elsa
let FIRST = fill_this_in
let SECOND = fill_this_in
let THIRD = fill_this_in
:
eval ex1 FIRST apple banana orange
=*> apple
:
eval ex2 SECOND apple banana orange
=*> banana
:
eval ex3 THIRD apple banana orange
=*> orange
ELSA: https://goto.ucsd.edu/elsa/index.html
Click here to try this exercise
Non-Terminating Evaluation
-> x x) (\x -> x x)
(\x =b> (\x -> x x) (\x -> x x)
Some programs loop back to themselves…
… and never reduce to a normal form!
This combinator is called Ω
What if we pass Ω as an argument to another function?
let OMEGA = (\x -> x x) (\x -> x x)
-> (\y -> y)) OMEGA (\x
Does this reduce to a normal form? Try it at home!
Programming in λ-calculus
Real languages have lots of features
- Booleans
- Records (structs, tuples)
- Numbers
- Functions [we got those]
- Recursion
Lets see how to encode all of these features with the λ-calculus.
λ-calculus: Booleans
How can we encode Boolean values (TRUE
and FALSE
) as functions?
Well, what do we do with a Boolean b
?
Make a binary choice
if b then e1 else e2
Booleans: API
We need to define three functions
let TRUE = ???
let FALSE = ???
let ITE = \b x y -> ??? -- if b then x else y
such that
ITE TRUE apple banana =~> apple
ITE FALSE apple banana =~> banana
(Here, let NAME = e
means NAME
is an abbreviation for e
)
Booleans: Implementation
let TRUE = \x y -> x -- Returns its first argument
let FALSE = \x y -> y -- Returns its second argument
let ITE = \b x y -> b x y -- Applies condition to branches
-- (redundant, but improves readability)
Example: Branches step-by-step
:
eval ite_trueITE TRUE e1 e2
=d> (\b x y -> b x y) TRUE e1 e2 -- expand def ITE
=b> (\x y -> TRUE x y) e1 e2 -- beta-step
=b> (\y -> TRUE e1 y) e2 -- beta-step
=b> TRUE e1 e2 -- expand def TRUE
=d> (\x y -> x) e1 e2 -- beta-step
=b> (\y -> e1) e2 -- beta-step
=b> e1
Example: Branches step-by-step
Now you try it!
Can you fill in the blanks to make it happen?
:
eval ite_falseITE FALSE e1 e2
-- fill the steps in!
=b> e2
EXERCISE: Boolean Operators
ELSA: https://goto.ucsd.edu/elsa/index.html Click here to try this exercise
Now that we have ITE
it’s easy to define other Boolean operators:
let NOT = \b -> ???
let OR = \b1 b2 -> ???
let AND = \b1 b2 -> ???
When you are done, you should get the following behavior:
:
eval ex_not_tNOT TRUE =*> FALSE
:
eval ex_not_fNOT FALSE =*> TRUE
:
eval ex_or_ffOR FALSE FALSE =*> FALSE
:
eval ex_or_ftOR FALSE TRUE =*> TRUE
:
eval ex_or_ftOR TRUE FALSE =*> TRUE
:
eval ex_or_ttOR TRUE TRUE =*> TRUE
:
eval ex_and_ffAND FALSE FALSE =*> FALSE
:
eval ex_and_ftAND FALSE TRUE =*> FALSE
:
eval ex_and_ftAND TRUE FALSE =*> FALSE
:
eval ex_and_ttAND TRUE TRUE =*> TRUE
Programming in λ-calculus
- Booleans [done]
- Records (structs, tuples)
- Numbers
- Functions [we got those]
- Recursion
λ-calculus: Records
Let’s start with records with two fields (aka pairs)
What do we do with a pair?
- Pack two items into a pair, then
- Get first item, or
- Get second item.
Pairs : API
We need to define three functions
let PAIR = \x y -> ??? -- Make a pair with elements x and y
-- { fst : x, snd : y }
let FST = \p -> ??? -- Return first element
-- p.fst
let SND = \p -> ??? -- Return second element
-- p.snd
such that
:
eval ex_fstFST (PAIR apple banana) =*> apple
:
eval ex_sndSND (PAIR apple banana) =*> banana
Pairs: Implementation
A pair of x
and y
is just something that lets you pick between x
and y
! (i.e. a function that takes a boolean and returns either x
or y
)
let PAIR = \x y -> (\b -> ITE b x y)
let FST = \p -> p TRUE -- call w/ TRUE, get first value
let SND = \p -> p FALSE -- call w/ FALSE, get second value
EXERCISE: Triples
How can we implement a record that contains three values?
ELSA: https://goto.ucsd.edu/elsa/index.html
Click here to try this exercise
let TRIPLE = \x y z -> ???
let FST3 = \t -> ???
let SND3 = \t -> ???
let THD3 = \t -> ???
:
eval ex1FST3 (TRIPLE apple banana orange)
=*> apple
:
eval ex2SND3 (TRIPLE apple banana orange)
=*> banana
:
eval ex3THD3 (TRIPLE apple banana orange)
=*> orange
Programming in λ-calculus
- Booleans [done]
- Records (structs, tuples) [done]
- Numbers
- Functions [we got those]
- Recursion
λ-calculus: Numbers
Let’s start with natural numbers (0, 1, 2, …)
What do we do with natural numbers?
- Count:
0
,inc
- Arithmetic:
dec
,+
,-
,*
- Comparisons:
==
,<=
, etc
Natural Numbers: API
We need to define:
- A family of numerals:
ZERO
,ONE
,TWO
,THREE
, … - Arithmetic functions:
INC
,DEC
,ADD
,SUB
,MULT
- Comparisons:
IS_ZERO
,EQ
Such that they respect all regular laws of arithmetic, e.g.
IS_ZERO ZERO =~> TRUE
IS_ZERO (INC ZERO) =~> FALSE
INC ONE =~> TWO
...
Natural Numbers: Implementation
Church numerals: a number N
is encoded as a combinator that calls a function on an argument N
times
let ONE = \f x -> f x
let TWO = \f x -> f (f x)
let THREE = \f x -> f (f (f x))
let FOUR = \f x -> f (f (f (f x)))
let FIVE = \f x -> f (f (f (f (f x))))
let SIX = \f x -> f (f (f (f (f (f x)))))
...
QUIZ: Church Numerals
Which of these is a valid encoding of ZERO
?
A:
let ZERO = \f x -> x
B:
let ZERO = \f x -> f
C:
let ZERO = \f x -> f x
D:
let ZERO = \x -> x
E: None of the above
Does this function look familiar?
λ-calculus: Increment
-- Call `f` on `x` one more time than `n` does
let INC = \n -> (\f x -> ???)
Example:
:
eval inc_zero INC ZERO
=d> (\n f x -> f (n f x)) ZERO
=b> \f x -> f (ZERO f x)
=*> \f x -> f x
=d> ONE
EXERCISE
Fill in the implementation of ADD
so that you get the following behavior
Click here to try this exercise
let ZERO = \f x -> x
let ONE = \f x -> f x
let TWO = \f x -> f (f x)
let INC = \n f x -> f (n f x)
let ADD = fill_this_in
:
eval add_zero_zeroADD ZERO ZERO =~> ZERO
:
eval add_zero_oneADD ZERO ONE =~> ONE
:
eval add_zero_twoADD ZERO TWO =~> TWO
:
eval add_one_zeroADD ONE ZERO =~> ONE
:
eval add_one_zeroADD ONE ONE =~> TWO
:
eval add_two_zeroADD TWO ZERO =~> TWO
QUIZ
How shall we implement ADD
?
A. let ADD = \n m -> n INC m
B. let ADD = \n m -> INC n m
C. let ADD = \n m -> n m INC
D. let ADD = \n m -> n (m INC)
E. let ADD = \n m -> n (INC m)
λ-calculus: Addition
-- Call `f` on `x` exactly `n + m` times
let ADD = \n m -> n INC m
Example:
:
eval add_one_zero ADD ONE ZERO
=~> ONE
QUIZ
How shall we implement MULT
?
A. let MULT = \n m -> n ADD m
B. let MULT = \n m -> n (ADD m) ZERO
C. let MULT = \n m -> m (ADD n) ZERO
D. let MULT = \n m -> n (ADD m ZERO)
E. let MULT = \n m -> (n ADD m) ZERO
λ-calculus: Multiplication
-- Call `f` on `x` exactly `n * m` times
let MULT = \n m -> n (ADD m) ZERO
Example:
:
eval two_times_three MULT TWO ONE
=~> TWO
Programming in λ-calculus
- Booleans [done]
- Records (structs, tuples) [done]
- Numbers [done]
- Lists
- Functions [we got those]
- Recursion
λ-calculus: Lists
Lets define an API to build lists in the λ-calculus.
An Empty List
NIL
Constructing a list
A list with 4 elements
CONS apple (CONS banana (CONS cantaloupe (CONS dragon NIL)))
intuitively CONS h t
creates a new list with
- head
h
- tail
t
Destructing a list
HEAD l
returns the first element of the listTAIL l
returns the rest of the list
HEAD (CONS apple (CONS banana (CONS cantaloupe (CONS dragon NIL))))
=~> apple
TAIL (CONS apple (CONS banana (CONS cantaloupe (CONS dragon NIL))))
=~> CONS banana (CONS cantaloupe (CONS dragon NIL)))
λ-calculus: Lists
let NIL = ???
let CONS = ???
let HEAD = ???
let TAIL = ???
:
eval exHdHEAD (CONS apple (CONS banana (CONS cantaloupe (CONS dragon NIL))))
=~> apple
eval exTl TAIL (CONS apple (CONS banana (CONS cantaloupe (CONS dragon NIL))))
=~> CONS banana (CONS cantaloupe (CONS dragon NIL)))
EXERCISE: Nth
Write an implementation of GetNth
such that
GetNth n l
returns the n-th element of the listl
Assume that l
has n or more elements
let GetNth = ???
:
eval nth1 GetNth ZERO (CONS apple (CONS banana (CONS cantaloupe NIL)))
=~> apple
:
eval nth1 GetNth ONE (CONS apple (CONS banana (CONS cantaloupe NIL)))
=~> banana
:
eval nth2 GetNth TWO (CONS apple (CONS banana (CONS cantaloupe NIL)))
=~> cantaloupe
Click here to try this in elsa
λ-calculus: Recursion
I want to write a function that sums up natural numbers up to n
:
let SUM = \n -> ... -- 0 + 1 + 2 + ... + n
such that we get the following behavior
: SUM ZERO =~> ZERO
eval exSum0: SUM ONE =~> ONE
eval exSum1: SUM TWO =~> THREE
eval exSum2: SUM THREE =~> SIX eval exSum3
Can we write sum using Church Numerals?
Click here to try this in Elsa
QUIZ
You can write SUM
using numerals but its tedious.
Is this a correct implementation of SUM
?
let SUM = \n -> ITE (ISZ n)
ZERO
ADD n (SUM (DEC n))) (
A. Yes
B. No
No!
- Named terms in Elsa are just syntactic sugar
- To translate an Elsa term to λ-calculus: replace each name with its definition
-> ITE (ISZ n)
\n ZERO
ADD n (SUM (DEC n))) -- But SUM is not yet defined! (
Recursion:
- Inside this function
- Want to call the same function on
DEC n
Looks like we can’t do recursion!
- Requires being able to refer to functions by name,
- But λ-calculus functions are anonymous.
Right?
λ-calculus: Recursion
Think again!
Recursion:
Instead of
Inside this function I want to call the same function onDEC n
Lets try
- Inside this function I want to call some function
rec
onDEC n
- And BTW, I want
rec
to be the same function
Step 1: Pass in the function to call “recursively”
let STEP =
-> \n -> ITE (ISZ n)
\rec ZERO
ADD n (rec (DEC n))) -- Call some rec (
Step 2: Do some magic to STEP
, so rec
is itself
-> ITE (ISZ n) ZERO (ADD n (rec (DEC n))) \n
That is, obtain a term MAGIC
such that
MAGIC =*> STEP MAGIC
λ-calculus: Fixpoint Combinator
Wanted: a λ-term FIX
such that
FIX STEP
callsSTEP
withFIX STEP
as the first argument:
FIX STEP) =*> STEP (FIX STEP) (
(In math: a fixpoint of a function f(x) is a point x, such that f(x) = x)
Once we have it, we can define:
let SUM = FIX STEP
Then by property of FIX
we have:
SUM =*> FIX STEP =*> STEP (FIX STEP) =*> STEP SUM
and so now we compute:
:
eval sum_twoSUM TWO
=*> STEP SUM TWO
=*> ITE (ISZ TWO) ZERO (ADD TWO (SUM (DEC TWO)))
=*> ADD TWO (SUM (DEC TWO))
=*> ADD TWO (SUM ONE)
=*> ADD TWO (STEP SUM ONE)
=*> ADD TWO (ITE (ISZ ONE) ZERO (ADD ONE (SUM (DEC ONE))))
=*> ADD TWO (ADD ONE (SUM (DEC ONE)))
=*> ADD TWO (ADD ONE (SUM ZERO))
=*> ADD TWO (ADD ONE (ITE (ISZ ZERO) ZERO (ADD ZERO (SUM DEC ZERO)))
=*> ADD TWO (ADD ONE (ZERO))
=*> THREE
How should we define FIX
???
The Y combinator
Remember Ω?
-> x x) (\x -> x x)
(\x =b> (\x -> x x) (\x -> x x)
This is self-replcating code! We need something like this but a bit more involved…
The Y combinator discovered by Haskell Curry:
let FIX = \stp -> (\x -> stp (x x)) (\x -> stp (x x))
How does it work?
:
eval fix_stepFIX STEP
=d> (\stp -> (\x -> stp (x x)) (\x -> stp (x x))) STEP
=b> (\x -> STEP (x x)) (\x -> STEP (x x))
=b> STEP ((\x -> STEP (x x)) (\x -> STEP (x x)))
-- ^^^^^^^^^^ this is FIX STEP ^^^^^^^^^^^
That’s all folks, Haskell Curry was very clever.
Next week: We’ll look at the language named after him (Haskell
)