cognitive psychology. PhD 
Is anyone aware of program synthesis research on better error messages, so you can figure out how to improve your spec if synthesis fails? (perhaps related to better type errors?)
Survey of error message research: https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3344429.3372508 … Nothing in there about synthesis. The only HCI-esque work that's been done on synthesis (to my knowledge) has been for programming by example: https://www.aaai.org/ojs/index.php/aimagazine/article/view/2262 …
-
-
(Geoffrey, check out Will's piece on "human-centric synthesis" https://plateau-workshop.org/assets/papers-2019/3.pdf …)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
But
@geoffreylitt I think your intuition is correct. If you knew the best way to help someone e.g. debug H-M type inference, that's a step to general synthesis. Another place to look would be debugging tactic programs in a proof assistant (maybe@TaliaRinger knows lit here?) -
Oh another relevant paper. "One λ at a time: What do we know about presenting human-friendly output from program analysis tools?" http://static.barik.net/barik/publications/plateau2017/tbarik-lambda-plateau2017.pdf …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
There is also some HCI-adjacent work on debugging symbolic execution for synthesis/verification in Rosette (specific to performance bottlenecks, rather than unsat results), out of UW. Including a small user study https://unsat.cs.washington.edu/papers/bornholt-sympro.pdf …
-
thanks!! definitely seems related
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.