A Semantic Foundation for Hidden State

  • Jan Schwinghammer
  • Hongseok Yang
  • Lars Birkedal
  • François Pottier
  • Bernhard Reus
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6014)


We present the first complete soundness proof of the antiframe rule, a recently proposed proof rule for capturing information hiding in the presence of higher-order store. Our proof involves solving a non-trivial recursive domain equation, and it helps identify some of the key ingredients for soundness.


  1. 1.
    Parkinson, M., Bierman, G.: Separation logic and abstraction. In: POPL, pp. 247–258 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Biering, B., Birkedal, L., Torp-Smith, N.: BI-hyperdoctrines, higher-order separation logic, and abstraction. TOPLAS 29(5) (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Parkinson, M., Bierman, G.: Separation logic, abstraction and inheritance. In: POPL, pp. 75–86 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pottier, F.: Hiding local state in direct style: a higher-order anti-frame rule. In: LICS, pp. 331–340 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reynolds, J.C.: Separation logic: A logic for shared mutable data structures. In: LICS, pp. 55–74 (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    O’Hearn, P.W., Yang, H., Reynolds, J.C.: Separation and information hiding. In: POPL, pp. 268–280 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Birkedal, L., Torp-Smith, N., Yang, H.: Semantics of separation-logic typing and higher-order frame rules for Algol-like languages. LMCS 2(5:1) (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Birkedal, L., Reus, B., Schwinghammer, J., Yang, H.: A simple model of separation logic for higher-order store. In: Aceto, L., Damgård, I., Goldberg, L.A., Halldórsson, M.M., Ingólfsdóttir, A., Walukiewicz, I. (eds.) ICALP 2008, Part II. LNCS, vol. 5126, pp. 348–360. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schwinghammer, J., Birkedal, L., Reus, B., Yang, H.: Nested Hoare triples and frame rules for higher-order store. In: CSL, pp. 440–454 (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pottier, F.: Three comments on the anti-frame rule (July 2009) (unpublished note)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Levy, P.B.: Possible world semantics for general storage in call-by-value. In: CSL, pp. 232–246 (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rutten, J.J.M.M.: Elements of generalized ultrametric domain theory. TCS 170(1-2), 349–381 (1996)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Birkedal, L., Støvring, K., Thamsborg, J.: The category-theoretic solution of recursive metric-space equations. Technical Report ITU-2009-119, IT University of Copenhagen (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schwinghammer, J., Yang, H., Birkedal, L., Pottier, F., Reus, B.: A semantic foundation for hidden state (December 2009), http://www.dcs.qmul.ac.uk/~hyang/paper/fossacs10-full.pdf
  15. 15.
    Streicher, T.: Domain-theoretic Foundations of Functional Programming. World Scientific, Singapore (2006)MATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    O’Hearn, P.W., Pym, D.J.: The logic of bunched implications. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 5(2), 215–244 (1999)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pilkiewicz, A., Pottier, F.: The essence of monotonic state (October 2009) (submitted)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pottier, F.: Generalizing the higher-order frame and anti-frame rules (July 2009) (unpublished note)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Schwinghammer
    • 1
  • Hongseok Yang
    • 2
  • Lars Birkedal
    • 3
  • François Pottier
    • 4
  • Bernhard Reus
    • 5
  1. 1.Saarland Univ 
  2. 2.Queen Mary Univ. of London 
  3. 3.IT Univ. of Copenhagen 
  4. 4.INRIA 
  5. 5.Univ. of Sussex 

Personalised recommendations