Dynamic languages such as Ruby, Python, and JavaScript have many compelling benefits, but the lack of static types means subtle errors can remain latent in code for a long time. While many researchers have developed various systems to bring some of the benefits of static types to dynamic languages, prior approaches have trouble dealing with metaprogramming, which generates code as the program executes. In this paper, we propose Hummingbird, a new system that uses a novel technique, just-in-time static type checking, to type check Ruby code even in the presence of metaprogramming. In Hummingbird, method type signatures are gathered dynamically at run-time, as those methods are created. When a method is called, Hummingbird statically type checks the method body against current type signatures. Thus, Hummingbird provides thorough static checks on a per-method basis, while also allowing arbitrarily complex metaprogramming. For performance, Hummingbird memoizes the static type checking pass, invalidating cached checks only if necessary. We formalize Hummingbird using a core, Ruby-like language and prove it sound. To evaluate Hummingbird, we applied it to six apps, including three that use Ruby on Rails, a powerful framework that relies heavily on metaprogramming. We found that all apps typecheck successfully using Hummingbird, and that Hummingbird’s performance overhead is reasonable. We applied Hummingbird to earlier versions of one Rails app and found several type errors that had been introduced and then fixed. Lastly, we demonstrate using Hummingbird in Rails development mode to typecheck an app as live updates are applied to it.
JavaScript is a popular language for client-side web scripting. It has a dubious reputation among programmers for two reasons. First, many JavaScript programs are written against a rapidly evolving API whose implementations are sometimes contradictory and idiosyncratic. Second, the language is only weakly typed and comes virtually without development tools. The present work is a first attempt to address the second point. It does so by defining a type system that tracks the possible traits of an object and flags suspicious type conversions. Because JavaScript is a classless, object-based language with first-class functions, the type system must include singleton types, subtyping, and first class record labels. The type system covers a representative subset of the language and there is a type soundness proof with respect to an operational semantics.  Scripting languages enjoy great popularity due to their support for rapid and exploratory development. They typically have lightweight syntax, weak data privacy, dynamic typing, powerful aggregate data types, and allow execution of the completed parts of incomplete programs. The price of these features comes later in the software life cycle. Scripts are hard to evolve and compose, and often slow. An additional weakness of most scripting languages is lack of support for concurrency - though concurrency is required for scalability and interacting with remote services. This paper reports on the design and implementation of Thorn, a novel programming language targeting the JVM. Our principal contributions are a careful selection of features that support the evolution of scripts into industrial grade programs - e.g., an expressive module system, an optional type annotation facility for declarations, and support for concurrency based on message passing between lightweight, isolated processes. On the implementation side, Thorn has been designed to accommodate the evolution of the language itself through a compiler plugin mechanism and target the Java virtual machine.  When scripts in untyped languages grow into large programs, maintaining them becomes difficult. A lack of types in typical scripting languages means that programmers must (re)discover critical pieces of design information every time they wish to change a program. This analysis step both slows down the maintenance process and may even introduce mistakes due to the violation of undiscovered invariants. This paper presents Typed Scheme, an explicitly typed extension of an untyped scripting language. Its type system is based on the novel notion of occurrence typing, which we formalize and mechanically prove sound. The implementation of Typed Scheme additionally borrows elements from a range of approaches, including recursive types, true unions and subtyping, plus polymorphism combined with a modicum of local inference. Initial experiments with the implementation suggest that Typed Scheme naturally accommodates the programming style of the underlying scripting language, at least for the first few thousand lines of ported code. Dynamically typed languages trade flexibility and ease of use for safety, while statically typed languages prioritize the early detection of bugs, and provide a better framework for structure large programs. The idea of optional typing is to combine the two approaches in the same language: the programmer can begin development with dynamic types, and migrate to static types as the program matures. The challenge is designing a type system that feels natural to the programmer that is used to programming in a dynamic language. This paper presents the initial design of Typed Lua, an optionally-typed extension of the Lua scripting language. Lua is an imperative scripting language with first class functions and lightweight metaprogramming mechanisms. The design of Typed Lua's type system has a novel combination of features that preserves some of the idioms that Lua programmers are used to, while bringing static type safety to them. We show how the major features of the type system type these idioms with some examples, and discuss some of the design issues we faced. Programmers reason about their programs using a wide variety of formal and informal methods. Programmers in untyped languages such as Scheme or Erlang are able to use any such method to reason about the type behavior of their programs. Our type system for Scheme accommodates common reasoning methods by assigning variable occurrences a subtype of their declared type based on the predicates prior to the occurrence, a discipline dubbed occurrence typing. It thus enables programmers to enrich existing Scheme code with types, while requiring few changes to the code itself. Three years of practical experience has revealed serious shortcomings of our type system. In particular, it relied on a system of ad-hoc rules to relate combinations of predicates, it could not reason about subcomponents of data structures, and it could not follow sophisticated reasoning about the relationship among predicate tests, all of which are used in existing code. In this paper, we reformulate occurrence typing to eliminate these shortcomings. The new formulation derives propositional logic formulas that hold when an expression evaluates to true or false, respectively. A simple proof system is then used to determine types of variable occurrences from these propositions. Our implementation of this revised occurrence type system thus copes with many more untyped programming idioms than the original system.  Current proposals for adding gradual typing to JavaScript, such as Closure, TypeScript and Dart, forgo soundness to deal with issues of scale, code reuse, and popular programming patterns. We show how to address these issues in practice while retaining soundness. We design and implement a new gradual type system, prototyped for expediency as a 'Safe' compilation mode for TypeScript. Our compiler achieves soundness by enforcing stricter static checks and embedding residual runtime checks in compiled code. It emits plain JavaScript that runs on stock virtual machines. Our main theorem is a simulation that ensures that the checks introduced by Safe TypeScript (1) catch any dynamic type error, and (2) do not alter the semantics of type-safe TypeScript code. Safe TypeScript is carefully designed to minimize the performance overhead of runtime checks. At its core, we rely on two new ideas: differential subtyping, a new form of coercive subtyping that computes the minimum amount of runtime type information that must be added to each object; and an erasure modality, which we use to safely and selectively erase type information. This allows us to scale our design to full-fledged TypeScript, including arrays, maps, classes, inheritance, overloading, and generic types. We validate the usability and performance of Safe TypeScript empirically by type-checking and compiling around 120,000 lines of existing TypeScript source code. Although runtime checks can be expensive, the end-to-end overhead is small for code bases that already have type annotations. For instance, we bootstrap the Safe TypeScript compiler (90,000 lines including the base TypeScript compiler): we measure a 15 runtime overhead for type safety, and also uncover programming errors as type safety violations. We conclude that, at least during development and testing, subjecting JavaScript TypeScript programs to safe gradual typing adds significant value to source type annotations at a modest cost. In the past, the creators of numerical programs had to choose between simple expression of mathematical formulas and static type checking. While the Lisp family and its dynamically typed relatives support the straightforward expression via a rich numeric tower, existing statically typed languages force programmers to pollute textbook formulas with explicit coercions or unwieldy notation. In this paper, we demonstrate how the type system of Typed Racket accommodates both a textbook programming style and expressive static checking. The type system provides a hierarchy of numeric types that can be freely mixed as well as precise specifications of sign, representation, and range information--all while supporting generic operations. In addition, the type system provides information to the compiler so that it can perform standard numeric optimizations. Object-oriented scripting languages like Javascript and Python are popular partly because of their dynamic features. These include the runtime modification of objects and classes through addition of fields or updating of methods. These features make static typing difficult and so usually dynamic typing is used. Consequently, errors such as access to non-existent members are not detected until runtime. We first develop a formalism for an object based language, JS0 with features from Javascript, including dynamic addition of fields and updating of methods. We give an operational semantics and static type system for JS0using structural types. Our types allow objects to evolve in a controlled manner by classifying members as definite or potential. We define a type inference algorithm for JS0 that is sound with respect to the type system. If the type inference algorithm succeeds, then the program is typeable. Therefore, programmers can benefit from the safety offered by the type system, without the need to write explicitly types in their programs. 