A syntactic approach to type soundness¶
Wright, A. K., & Felleisen, M. (1994). A syntactic approach to type soundness. Information and Computation, 115(1), 38-94.
Cited by¶
4 citations across 3 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Closure
- Wright and Felleisen (1994) establish this preservation-and-progress decomposition as the canonical organisational scheme for soundness proofs in modern programming-language theory.
This sourceCanonical paper establishing the preservation-and-progress decomposition (closure of typing under reduction; closure of values within each type) as the standard organisational scheme for syntactic type-soundness proofs.
- Wright and Felleisen (1994) establish this preservation-and-progress decomposition as the canonical organisational scheme for soundness proofs in modern programming-language theory.
- Mathematical Induction
- The principle ascends to higher proof-theoretic territory. Structural induction on syntax trees proves semantic properties of programming languages: if every leaf and every constructor preserves property \(P\), then all expressions have \(P\) — this is the content of Wright-Felleisen's
This sourceCanonical paper establishing the preservation-and-progress decomposition (closure of typing under reduction; closure of values within each type) as the standard organisational scheme for syntactic type-soundness proofs.
- The principle ascends to higher proof-theoretic territory. Structural induction on syntax trees proves semantic properties of programming languages: if every leaf and every constructor preserves property \(P\), then all expressions have \(P\) — this is the content of Wright-Felleisen's
Domain-specific¶
- Subject reduction
- Subject reduction states that if Γ⊢e:τ and e reduces to e′, then Γ⊢e′:τ, usually forming type soundness together with progress or an analogous no-stuck theorem.
- … that the syntax, typing relation, operational reduction, context discipline, substitution lemma, and exact preservation theorem are fixed and every permitted step retains the type. to An applied instance preserves the same invariant under a changed scale, notation, jurisdiction, dataset, or implementation..
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 4 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:e2febf67ff4a · see in the full table