A practitioner’s guide to reading programming languages papers

Last week I jokingly said that POPL papers must pass an ‘intellectual intimidation’ threshold in order to be accepted. That’s not true of course, but it is the case that programming languages papers can look especially intimidating to the practitioner (or indeed, the academic working in a different sub-discipline of computer science!). They are full … Continue reading A practitioner’s guide to reading programming languages papers

A static verification framework for message passing in Go using behavioural types

A static verification framework for message passing in Go using behavioural types Lange et al., ICSE 18 With thanks to Alexis Richardson who first forwarded this paper to me. We’re jumping ahead to ICSE 18 now, and a paper that has been accepted for publication there later this year. It fits with the theme we’ve … Continue reading A static verification framework for message passing in Go using behavioural types

Linear Haskell: Practical linearity in a higher-order polymorphic language

Linear Haskell: Practical linearity in a higher-order polymorphic language Bernardy et al., POPL 18 I went in expecting this paper to be hard work. I mean, (a) it’s a POPL paper, (b) it’s about Haskell, and (c) not only is it about Haskell, it’s about an extension to the Haskell type system! I was more … Continue reading Linear Haskell: Practical linearity in a higher-order polymorphic language

Why is random testing effective for partition tolerance bugs?

Why is random testing effective for partition tolerance bugs? Majumdar & Niksic, POPL 18 A little randomness is a powerful thing! It can make the impossible possible (FLP ), balance systems remarkably well (the power of two random choices), and of course underpin much of cryptography. Today’s paper choice examines the unreasonable effectiveness of random … Continue reading Why is random testing effective for partition tolerance bugs?