Invertibility is a fundamental concept in computer science, with various manifestations in software development (serializer/deserializer, parser/printer, redo/undo, compressor/decompressor, and so on). Full invertibility necessarily requires bijectivity, but the direct approach of composing bijective functions to develop invertible programs is too restrictive to be useful. In this paper, we take a different approach by focusing on partially invertible functions—functions that become invertible if some of their arguments are fixed. The simplest example of such is addition, which becomes invertible when fixing one of the operands. More involved examples include entropy-based compression methods (e.g., Huffman coding), which carry the occurrence frequency of input symbols (in certain formats such as Huffman tree), and fixing this frequency information makes the compression methods invertible.

We develop a language Sparcl for programming such functions in a natural way, where partial invertibility is the norm and bijectivity is a special case, hence gaining significant expressiveness without compromising correctness. The challenge in designing such a language is to allow ordinary programming (the “partially” part) to interact with the invertible part freely, and yet guarantee invertibility by construction. The language Sparcl is linear-typed and has a type constructor to distinguish data that are subject to invertible computation and those that are not. We present the syntax, type system, and semantics of the language and prove that Sparcl correctly guarantees invertibility for its programs. We demonstrate the expressiveness of Sparcl with examples including tree rebuilding from preorder and inorder traversals, Huffman coding, arithmetic coding, and LZ77 compression.

We study a fundamental efficiency benefit afforded by delimited control, showing that for certain higher-order functions, a language with advanced control features offers an asymptotic improvement in runtime over a language without them. Specifically, we consider the generic count problem in the context of a pure functional base language ${\lambda_{\textrm{b}}}$ and an extension ${\lambda_{\textrm{h}}}$ with general effect handlers. We prove that ${\lambda_{\textrm{h}}}$ admits an asymptotically more efficient implementation of generic count than any implementation in ${\lambda_{\textrm{b}}}$. We also show that this gap remains even when ${\lambda_{\textrm{b}}}$ is extended to a language ${{{{{{\lambda_{\textrm{a}}}}}}}}$ with affine effect handlers, which is strong enough to encode exceptions, local state, coroutines and single-shot continuations. This locates the efficiency difference in the gap between ‘single-shot’ and ‘multi-shot’ versions of delimited control.

To our knowledge, these results are the first of their kind for control operators.

The naive combination of polymorphic effects and polymorphic type assignment has been well known to break type safety. In the literature, there are two kinds of approaches to this problem: one is to restrict how effects are triggered and the other is to restrict how they are implemented. This work explores a new approach to ensuring the safety of the use of polymorphic effects in polymorphic type assignment. A novelty of our work is to restrict effect interfaces. To formalize our idea, we employ algebraic effects and handlers, where an effect interface is given by a set of operations coupled with type signatures. We propose signature restriction, a new notion to restrict the type signatures of operations and show that signature restriction ensures type safety of a language equipped with polymorphic effects and unrestricted polymorphic type assignment. We also develop a type-and-effect system to enable the use of both of the operations that satisfy and those that do not satisfy the signature restriction in a single program.