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?)
-
-
Replying to @geoffreylitt1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
-
Replying to @maxkriegers @geoffreylitt
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 …
3 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
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?)3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
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 …
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.
cognitive psychology. PhD