Adjoint Reactive GUI Programming

Most interaction with a computer is via graphical user interfaces. These are traditionally implemented imperatively, using shared mutable state and callbacks. This is efficient, but is also difficult to reason about and error prone. Functional Reactive Programming (FRP) provides an elegant alternative which allows GUIs to be designed in a declarative fashion. However, most FRP languages are synchronous and continually check for new data. This means that an FRP-style GUI will “wake up” on each program cycle. This is problematic for applications like text editors and browsers, where often nothing happens for extended periods of time, and we want the implementation to sleep until new data arrives. In this paper, we present an asynchronous FRP language for designing GUIs called $$\lambda _{\mathsf {Widget}}$$ λ Widget . Our language provides a novel semantics for widgets, the building block of GUIs, which offers both a natural Curry–Howard logical interpretation and an efficient implementation strategy.

Fault-tolerant functional reactive programming (extended version)

Highly critical application domains, like medicine and aerospace, require the use of strict design, implementation, and validation techniques. Functional languages have been used in these domains to develop synchronous dataflow programming languages for reactive systems. Causal stream functions and functional reactive programming (FRP) capture the essence of those languages in a way that is both elegant and robust. To guarantee that critical systems can operate under high stress over long periods of time, these applications require clear specifications of possible faults and hazards, and how they are being handled. Modeling failure is straightforward in functional languages, and many functional reactive abstractions incorporate support for failure or termination. However, handling unknown types of faults, and incorporating fault tolerance into FRP, requires a different construction and remains an open problem. This work demonstrates how to extend an existing functional reactive framework with fault tolerance features. At value level, we tag faulty signals with reliability and probability information and use random testing to inject faults and validate system properties encoded in temporal logic. At type level, we tag components with the kinds of faults they may exhibit and use type-level programming to obtain compile-time guarantees of key aspects of fault tolerance. Our approach is powerful enough to be used in systems with realistic complexity, and flexible enough to be used to guide system analysis and design, validate system properties in the presence of faults, perform runtime monitoring, and study the effects of different fault tolerance mechanisms.

Runtime verification and validation of functional reactive systems

Many types of interactive applications, including reactive systems implemented in hardware, interactive physics simulations and games, raise particular challenges when it comes to testing and debugging. Reasons include de facto lack of reproducibility and difficulties of automatically generating suitable test data. This paper demonstrates that certain variants of functional reactive programming (FRP) implemented in pure functional languages can mitigate such difficulties by offering referential transparency at the level of whole programs. This opens up for a multi-pronged approach for assisting with testing and debugging that works across platforms, including assertions based on temporal logic, recording and replaying of runs (also from deployed code), and automated random testing using QuickCheck. When combined with extensible forms of FRP that allow for constrained side effects, it allows us to not only validate software simulations but to analyse the effect of faults in reactive systems, confirm the efficacy of fault tolerance mechanisms and perform software- and hardware-in-the-loop testing. The approach has been validated on non-trivial systems implemented in several existing FRP implementations, by means of careful debugging using a tool that allows the test or simulation under scrutiny to be controlled, moving along the execution time line, and pin-pointing of violations of assertions on personal computers as well as external devices.