An abstract data type (ADT) can be defined as a set of values together with some operations. From the perspective of formal verification, the specifications of those operations should also be a part of an ADT.
When we implemented BSTs in SearchTree, we saw that maintaining a representation invariant was important to rule out trees that could never be constructed through operations of the data structure. That invariant became a precondition for many operations, though there was no need for clients of the data structure to know any details of the invariant.
In this chapter we'll study a little of Coq's module system, which enables hiding some details of the implementation of an ADT, while also exposing the formal specification of the ADT.
Some prior knowledge of an ML-style module system, especially OCaml's, will be helpful. Here are some sources that cover it:

An association table is an ADT that binds keys to values. There are many other names for this concept, including map. We've already used that name before, though, for a specific data structure using higher-order functions. So for clarity in this chapter we use table.
Below is a Coq Module Type that declares an interface for the table ADT. A parameter is like a definition, except it declares only the type of an identifier, not the value to which it is bound. An axiom is similarly like a theorem, except no proof is provided.

Module Type Table.
A table is a binding from keys to values. It is total, meaning it binds all keys.
Parameter table : Type.
Keys are natural numbers.
Definition key := nat.
Values are an arbitrary type V.
Parameter V : Type.
The default value to which keys are bound.
Parameter default : V.
empty is the table that binds all keys to the default value.
Parameter empty : table.
get k t is the value v to which k is bound in t.
Parameter get : key table V.
set k v t is the table that binds k to v and otherwise has the same bindings as t.
Parameter set : key V table table.
The following three axioms are an equational specification for the table ADT.

Axiom get_empty_default : (k : key),
get k empty = default.

Axiom get_set_same : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
get k (set k v t) = v.

Axiom get_set_other : (k k' : key) (v : V) (t : table),
k k' get k' (set k v t) = get k' t.

End Table.

# Implementing Table with Functions

We can implement Table with a Module that is parameterized on the type of values -- or, rather, parameterized on a module that contains such a type. A parameterized module is also called a functor.
Module type ValType says that there must be a type named V, with a default value provided:

Module Type ValType.
Parameter V : Type.
Parameter default : V.
End ValType.
Functor FunTable takes as input a module of type ValType, which must therefore contain a type V. As output, FunTable produces a module of type Table. By writing <: Table, below, we ask Coq to check that the output module contains all the components required by Table.

Module FunTable (VT : ValType) <: Table.

Definition V := VT.V.
Definition default := VT.default.
Definition key := nat.
A table is a function from keys to values.
Definition table := key V.

Definition empty : table :=
fun _default.

Definition get (k : key) (t : table) : V :=
t k.

Definition set (k : key) (v : V) (t : table) : table :=
fun k'if k =? k' then v else t k'.
The implementation must prove the theorems that the interface specified as axioms.

Theorem get_empty_default: (k : key),
get k empty = default.
Proof. intros. unfold get, empty. reflexivity. Qed.

Theorem get_set_same: (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
get k (set k v t) = v.
Proof. intros. unfold get, set. bdall. Qed.

Theorem get_set_other: (k k' : key) (v : V) (t : table),
k k' get k' (set k v t) = get k' t.
Proof. intros. unfold get, set. bdall. Qed.
End FunTable.
As an example, let's instantiate FunTable with strings as values.

Module StringVal.
Definition V := string.
Definition default := ""%string.
End StringVal.

Module FunTableExamples.

Module StringFunTable := FunTable StringVal.
Import StringFunTable.
Open Scope string_scope.

Example ex1 : get 0 empty = "".
Proof. reflexivity. Qed.

Example ex2 : get 0 (set 0 "A" empty) = "A".
Proof. reflexivity. Qed.

Example ex3 : get 1 (set 0 "A" empty) = "".
Proof. reflexivity. Qed.

End FunTableExamples.

#### Exercise: 2 stars, standard, optional (NatFunTableExamples)

Define a module that uses FunTable to implement a table mapping keys to values, where the values have type nat, with a default of 0. Write unit tests to check the operation of get and set.

Module NatFunTableExamples.
(* FILL IN HERE *)
End NatFunTableExamples.

# Implementing Table with Lists

#### Exercise: 3 stars, standard (lists_table)

Use association lists to implement Table.

Module ListsTable (VT : ValType) <: Table.

Definition V := VT.V.
Definition default := VT.default.
Definition key := nat.
Definition table := list (key × V).

Definition empty : table := [].

Fixpoint get (k : key) (t : table) : V
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Definition set (k : key) (v : V) (t : table) : table
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Theorem get_empty_default: (k : key),
get k empty = default.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem get_set_same: (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
get k (set k v t) = v.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem get_set_other: (k k' : key) (v : V) (t : table),
k k' get k' (set k v t) = get k' t.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

End ListsTable.
Instantiate your table and prove the following facts.

Module StringListsTableExamples.

Module StringListsTable := ListsTable StringVal.
Import StringListsTable.
Open Scope string_scope.

Example ex1 : get 0 empty = "".
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Example ex2 : get 0 (set 0 "A" empty) = "A".
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Example ex3 : get 1 (set 0 "A" empty) = "".
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

End StringListsTableExamples.

# Implementing Table with BSTs

Tables implemented with functions and association lists are, of course, inefficient. For a more efficient implementation, we can use BSTs.

Module TreeTable (VT : ValType) <: Table.

Definition V := VT.V.
Definition default := VT.default.
Definition key := nat.
Definition table := tree V.

Definition empty : table :=
@empty_tree V.

Definition get (k : key) (t: table) : V :=
lookup default k t.

Definition set (k : key) (v : V) (t : table) : table :=
insert k v t.
The three basic equations we proved about tree in SearchTree make short work of the theorems we need to prove for Table.

Theorem get_empty_default: (k : key),
get k empty = default.
Proof.
apply lookup_empty.
Qed.

Theorem get_set_same: (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
get k (set k v t) = v.
Proof.
intros. unfold get, set. apply lookup_insert_eq.
Qed.

Theorem get_set_other: (k k' : key) (v : V) (t : table),
k k' get k' (set k v t) = get k' t.
Proof.
intros. unfold get, set. apply lookup_insert_neq. assumption.
Qed.

End TreeTable.

# Tables with an elements Operation

Now let's consider a richer interface ETable for Tables that support bound and elements operation.

## A First Attempt at ETable

Module Type ETable_first_attempt.
Include, as the name suggests, includes all the declarations from Table. Not only does that save keystrokes, it also means if we ever update Table to have new operations or new types, they automatically get included here, too.
Include Table.

Parameter bound : key table bool.
Parameter elements : table list (key × V).

Axiom elements_complete : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
bound k t = true
get k t = v
In (k, v) (elements t).

Axiom elements_correct : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
In (k, v) (elements t)
bound k t = true get k t = v.

End ETable_first_attempt.
We proved in SearchTree that the BST elements operation is correct and complete. So we ought to be able to implement ETable with BSTs. Let's try.
Include all the definitions from TreeTable, instantiated on VT.
Include TreeTable VT.
Thanks to the Include, we now have all the tree operations defined "for free" in this module. For example:
Check get : key table V.

Definition bound (k : key) (t : table) : bool :=
SearchTree.bound k t.

Definition elements (t : table) : list (key × V) :=
SearchTree.elements t.

Theorem elements_complete : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
bound k t = true
get k t = v
In (k, v) (elements t).
Proof.
intros k v t Hbound Hlookup. unfold get in Hlookup.
pose proof t as H is equivalent to assert (H : ...the type of t...). { apply t. } but saves some keystrokes.
pose proof (SearchTree.elements_complete) as Hcomplete.
unfold elements_complete_spec in Hcomplete.
apply Hcomplete with default.
-
Stuck! We don't know that t satisfies the BST invariant.

Theorem elements_correct : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
In (k, v) (elements t)
bound k t = true get k t = v.
Proof.
intros k v t Hin.
pose proof (SearchTree.elements_correct) as Hcorrect.
unfold elements_correct_spec in Hcorrect.
apply Hcorrect.
-
Again stuck because of the BST invariant.

End TreeETable_first_attempt.

## A Revised ETable

To prove that elements is correct, we need to know that trees satisfy the BST invariant. So, we declare a function rep_ok in the interface, and use it as a precondition for values of type table. We also add axioms to state that the ADT operations produce values that satisfy the representation invariant, i.e., it is a postcondition. And, we add a specification of bound.

Module Type ETable.

Include Table.

Parameter rep_ok : table Prop.
Parameter bound : key table bool.
Parameter elements : table list (key × V).
empty and set produce valid representations.

Axiom empty_ok : rep_ok empty.

Axiom set_ok : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t rep_ok (set k v t).
The specification of bound:

Axiom bound_empty : (k : key),
bound k empty = false.

Axiom bound_set_same : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
bound k (set k v t) = true.

Axiom bound_set_other : (k k' : key) (v : V) (t : table),
k k' bound k' (set k v t) = bound k' t.
The specification of elements:

Axiom elements_complete : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t
bound k t = true
get k t = v
In (k, v) (elements t).

Axiom elements_correct : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t
In (k, v) (elements t)
bound k t = true get k t = v.

End ETable.

Module TreeETable (VT : ValType) <: ETable.

Include TreeTable VT.

Definition rep_ok (t : table) : Prop :=
BST t.

Definition bound (k : key) (t : table) : bool :=
SearchTree.bound k t.

Definition elements (t : table) : list (key × V) :=
SearchTree.elements t.

Theorem empty_ok : rep_ok empty.
Proof.
apply empty_tree_BST.
Qed.

Theorem set_ok : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t rep_ok (set k v t).
Proof.
apply insert_BST.
Qed.

Theorem bound_empty : (k : key),
bound k empty = false.
Proof.
reflexivity.
Qed.

Theorem bound_set_same : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
bound k (set k v t) = true.
Proof.
intros k v t. unfold bound, set. induction t; bdall.
Qed.

Theorem bound_set_other : (k k' : key) (v : V) (t : table),
k k' bound k' (set k v t) = bound k' t.
Proof.
intros k k' v t Hneq. unfold bound, set. induction t; bdall.
Qed.

Theorem elements_complete : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t
bound k t = true
get k t = v
In (k, v) (elements t).
Proof.
intros k v t Hbound Hlookup.
pose proof SearchTree.elements_complete as Hcomplete.
unfold elements_complete_spec in Hcomplete.
apply Hcomplete; assumption.
Qed.

Theorem elements_correct : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t
In (k, v) (elements t)
bound k t = true get k t = v.
Proof.
intros k v t. simpl. intros Hin.
pose proof SearchTree.elements_correct as Hcorrect.
unfold elements_correct_spec in Hcorrect.
apply Hcorrect; assumption.
Qed.

End TreeETable.
Now we can use the table.

Module StringTreeETableExample.

Module StringTreeETable := TreeETable StringVal.
Import StringTreeETable.
Open Scope string_scope.

Example ex1 :
In (0, "A") (elements (set 0 "A" (set 1 "B" empty))).
Proof.
apply elements_complete;
auto using empty_ok, set_ok, bound_set_same, get_set_same.
Qed.

End StringTreeETableExample.

# Encapsulation with the Coq Module System (Advanced)

Functor TreeETable, above, reveals internal implementation details that your data structures class probably taught you are better kept private. For example, the constructors E and T of trees and the implementation of get are publicly exposed:

Example exposed_trees_ex :
(StringTreeETableExample.StringTreeETable.get 0 (T E 0 "A" E) = "A")%string.
Proof.
unfold StringTreeETableExample.StringTreeETable.get. (* we can see lookup *)
reflexivity.
Qed.
Like many languages, Coq makes it possible to encapsulate these details, meaning that they become hidden outside the module. It's a simple matter of changing the <: syntax to : in the functor's type. The only change in the implementation below is that one character.
The : syntax makes the module type opaque: only what is revealed in the type is available for code outside the module to use. The <: syntax, however, makes the module type transparent: the module must conform to the type, but everything about the module is still revealed.

Module TreeETableFullyEncapsulated (VT : ValType) : ETable.
Include TreeTable VT.

Definition rep_ok (t : table) : Prop :=
BST t.

Definition bound (k : key) (t : table) : bool :=
SearchTree.bound k t.

Definition elements (t : table) : list (key × V) :=
SearchTree.elements t.

Theorem empty_ok : rep_ok empty.
Proof.
apply empty_tree_BST.
Qed.

Theorem set_ok : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t rep_ok (set k v t).
Proof.
apply insert_BST.
Qed.

Theorem bound_empty : (k : key),
bound k empty = false.
Proof.
reflexivity.
Qed.

Theorem bound_set_same : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
bound k (set k v t) = true.
Proof.
intros k v t. unfold bound, set. induction t; bdall.
Qed.

Theorem bound_set_other : (k k' : key) (v : V) (t : table),
k k' bound k' (set k v t) = bound k' t.
Proof.
intros k k' v t Hneq. unfold bound, set. induction t; bdall.
Qed.

Theorem elements_complete : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t
bound k t = true
get k t = v
In (k, v) (elements t).
Proof.
intros k v t Hbound Hlookup.
pose proof SearchTree.elements_complete as Hcomplete.
unfold elements_complete_spec in Hcomplete.
apply Hcomplete; assumption.
Qed.

Theorem elements_correct : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t
In (k, v) (elements t)
bound k t = true get k t = v.
Proof.
intros k v t. simpl. intros Hin.
pose proof SearchTree.elements_correct as Hcorrect.
unfold elements_correct_spec in Hcorrect.
apply Hcorrect; assumption.
Qed.

End TreeETableFullyEncapsulated.
Unfortunately, the module is now too encapsulated to be useful:

Module OverlyEncapsulatedExample.

Module StringTreeETableFullyEncapsulated := TreeETableFullyEncapsulated StringVal.
Import StringTreeETableFullyEncapsulated.
Open Scope string_scope.

Fail Example ex1 : get 0 empty = "".
(* fails with an error about "" not having type V *)

End OverlyEncapsulatedExample.
The problem is that the module now hides not only the internal implementation, but also the value type V. The functor was instantiated on StringVal, which defines that type as string. But the output of the functor has type ETable, which doesn't reveal anything about V except that it is a Type. Note in the output of the following command how V is printed like an axiom would be, indicating that nothing is known (externally) about its implementation:
We need to selectively expose certain implementation details. We've just seen that V should be exposed. Along with it, we'll also want default to be exposed. We can accomplish that with an advanced feature of Coq's module system. The Coq manual doesn't give this feature a name, but OCaml (in which Coq is implemented) calls it a sharing constraint, so we'll use that term here. A sharing constraint enables us to constrain definitions shared by modules to be the same.

Module Type SimpleTable.
Parameter key : Type.
Parameter V : Type.
Parameter default : V.
Parameter table : Type.
(* We omit everything else for sake of a simple example. *)
End SimpleTable.

Module SimpleStringTable1 : SimpleTable.
Definition key := nat.
Definition V := string.
Definition default : string := "".
Definition table := tree V.
End SimpleStringTable1.

(* V is abstract. *)
Print SimpleStringTable1.V.

Module Type SimpleTable2 := SimpleTable with Definition V := string.

Module SimpleStringTable2 : SimpleTable2.
Definition key := nat.
Definition V := string.
Definition default : string := "".
Definition table := tree V.
End SimpleStringTable2.

(* V is exposed, but default is abstract. *)
Print SimpleStringTable2.V.
Print SimpleStringTable2.default.

Module Type SimpleTable3 := SimpleTable
with Definition V := string
with Definition default := ""%string.

Module SimpleStringTable3 : SimpleTable3.
Definition key := nat.
Definition V := string.
Definition default : string := "".
Definition table := tree V.
End SimpleStringTable3.

(* Both V and default are exposed. *)
Print SimpleStringTable3.V.
Print SimpleStringTable3.default.
Putting sharing constraints to use, let's expose V and default in our implementation of tree-based tables.

Module TreeETableEncapsulated (VT : ValType) : (ETable with Definition V := VT.V with Definition default := VT.default).

Include TreeTable VT.

Definition rep_ok (t : table) : Prop :=
BST t.

Definition bound (k : key) (t : table) : bool :=
SearchTree.bound k t.

Definition elements (t : table) : list (key × V) :=
SearchTree.elements t.

Theorem empty_ok : rep_ok empty.
Proof.
apply empty_tree_BST.
Qed.

Theorem set_ok : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t rep_ok (set k v t).
Proof.
apply insert_BST.
Qed.

Theorem bound_empty : (k : key),
bound k empty = false.
Proof.
reflexivity.
Qed.

Theorem bound_set_same : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
bound k (set k v t) = true.
Proof.
intros k v t. unfold bound, set. induction t; bdall.
Qed.

Theorem bound_set_other : (k k' : key) (v : V) (t : table),
k k' bound k' (set k v t) = bound k' t.
Proof.
intros k k' v t Hneq. unfold bound, set. induction t; bdall.
Qed.

Theorem elements_complete : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t
bound k t = true
get k t = v
In (k, v) (elements t).
Proof.
intros k v t Hbound Hlookup.
pose proof SearchTree.elements_complete as Hcomplete.
unfold elements_complete_spec in Hcomplete.
apply Hcomplete; assumption.
Qed.

Theorem elements_correct : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t
In (k, v) (elements t)
bound k t = true get k t = v.
Proof.
intros k v t. simpl. intros Hin.
pose proof SearchTree.elements_correct as Hcorrect.
unfold elements_correct_spec in Hcorrect.
apply Hcorrect; assumption.
Qed.

End TreeETableEncapsulated.

Module NicelyEncapsulatedExample.

Module StringTreeETableEncapsulated := TreeETableEncapsulated StringVal.
Import StringTreeETableEncapsulated.
Open Scope string_scope.

Example ex1 : get 0 empty = "".
Proof.
(* We can't directly simplify, because get is encapsulated. *)
Fail reflexivity.
(* But we can use the specifications exposed in the interface. *)
apply get_empty_default.
Qed.

(* We can't fabricate trees with T and E anymore, because tree
is encapsulated. *)

Fail Example ex2 : get 0 (T E 0 "A" E) = "A".
End NicelyEncapsulatedExample.
Note what we've happily achieved: we can reason about the behavior of an ADT entirely from its specification, rather than depending on the implementation code. This is what specification comments in interfaces attempt to achieve in real-world code.

#### Exercise: 4 stars, advanced, optional (elements_spec)

Develop a nicely-encapsulated interface and implementation of tree-based tables that exposes the rest of the specification of elements from SearchTree, including the inverses of correctness and completenesss, sortedness, and non-duplication. Send us your solution, so we can include it!

# Model-based Specification

The interfaces above have been based on equational specification of tables. Let's consider model-based specifications. Recall from SearchTree that in this style of specification, we
• introduce an abstraction function (or relation) that associates a concrete value of the ADT implementation with an abstract value in an already well-understood type; and
• show that the concrete and abstract operations are related in a sensible way.
We begin by defining a new map operation, bound, and redefining existing operations to make them more clear in the table specification we are about to write.

Definition map_update {V : Type}
(k : key) (v : V) (m : partial_map V) : partial_map V :=
update m k v.

Definition map_find {V : Type} := @find V.

Definition empty_map {V : Type} := @Maps.empty V.
Now we can define an interface for tables that includes an abstraction function Abs, and specifications written in terms of it.

Module Type ETableAbs.

Parameter table : Type.
Definition key := nat.
Parameter V : Type.
Parameter default : V.

Parameter empty : table.
Parameter get : key table V.
Parameter set : key V table table.
Parameter bound : key table bool.
Parameter elements : table list (key × V).

Parameter Abs : table partial_map V.
Parameter rep_ok : table Prop.

Axiom empty_ok :
rep_ok empty.

Axiom set_ok : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t rep_ok (set k v t).

Axiom empty_relate :
Abs empty = empty_map.

Axiom bound_relate : (t : table) (k : key),
rep_ok t
map_bound k (Abs t) = bound k t.

Axiom lookup_relate : (t : table) (k : key),
rep_ok t
map_find default k (Abs t) = get k t.

Axiom insert_relate : (t : table) (k : key) (v : V),
rep_ok t
map_update k v (Abs t) = Abs (set k v t).

Axiom elements_relate : (t : table),
rep_ok t
Abs t = map_of_list (elements t).

End ETableAbs.

#### Exercise: 4 stars, standard (list_etable_abs)

Implement ETableAbs using association lists as the representation type.

Module ListETableAbs (VT : ValType) <: ETableAbs.

Definition V := VT.V.
Definition default := VT.default.
Definition key := nat.
Definition table := list (key × V).

Definition empty : table
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Fixpoint get (k : key) (t : table) : V
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Definition set (k : key) (v : V) (t : table) : table
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Fixpoint bound (k : key) (t : table) : bool
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Definition elements (t : table) : list (key × V)
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Definition Abs (t : table) : partial_map V
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Definition rep_ok (t : table) : Prop
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Theorem empty_ok : rep_ok empty.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem set_ok : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
rep_ok t rep_ok (set k v t).
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem empty_relate :
Abs empty = empty_map.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem bound_relate : (t : table) (k : key),
rep_ok t
map_bound k (Abs t) = bound k t.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem lookup_relate : (t : table) (k : key),
rep_ok t
map_find default k (Abs t) = get k t.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem insert_relate : (t : table) (k : key) (v : V),
rep_ok t
map_update k v (Abs t) = Abs (set k v t).
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem elements_relate : (t : table),
rep_ok t
Abs t = map_of_list (elements t).
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

End ListETableAbs.

(* Instantiate functor for sake of autograding. *)
Module StringListETableAbs := ListETableAbs StringVal.

#### Exercise: 3 stars, standard, optional (TreeTableModel)

Give an implementation of ETableAbs using the abstraction function Abs from SearchTree. All the proofs of the relate axioms should be simple applications of the lemmas already proved as exercises in that chapter.

(* Do not modify the following line: *)
Definition manual_grade_for_TreeTableModel : option (nat×string) := None.

#### Exercise: 2 stars, advanced, optional (TreeTableModel')

Repeat the previous exercise, this time using the alternative Abs' function from SearchTree. Hint: Just tweak your solution to the previous exercise.

With equational specifications:
• Define a representation invariant to characterize which values of the representation type are legal. Prove that each operation on the representation type preserves the representation invariant.
• Using the representation invariant, verify the equational specification.
With model-based specifications:
• Define and verify preservation of the the representation invariant.
• Define an abstraction function that relates the representation type to another type that is easier to reason about.
• Prove that operations of the abstract and concrete types commute with the abstraction function.

Here is an interface and algebraic specification for FIFO queues. To ensure totality, peek takes a default value and deq returns the empty queue when applied to the empty queue.

Module Type Queue.
Parameter V : Type.
Parameter queue : Type.
Parameter empty: queue.
Parameter is_empty : queue bool.
Parameter enq : queue V queue.
Parameter deq : queue queue.
Parameter peek : V queue V.
Axiom is_empty_empty : is_empty empty = true.
Axiom is_empty_nonempty : q v, is_empty (enq q v) = false.
Axiom peek_empty : d, peek d empty = d.
Axiom peek_nonempty : d q v, peek d (enq q v) = peek v q.
Axiom deq_empty : deq empty = empty.
Axiom deq_nonempty : q v, deq (enq q v) = if is_empty q then q else enq (deq q) v.
End Queue.

#### Exercise: 3 stars, standard (list_queue)

Implement that interface and verify your implementation. As the representation type, use list V. At least one operation will have to be linear time; we recommend that it be enq. All the proofs should be quite easy.

Module ListQueue <: Queue.
Definition V := nat. (* for simplicity *)
Definition queue := list V.

Definition empty : queue
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Definition is_empty (q : queue) : bool
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Definition enq (q : queue) (v : V) : queue
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Definition deq (q : queue) : queue
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Definition peek (default : V) (q : queue) : V
(* REPLACE THIS LINE WITH ":= _your_definition_ ." *). Admitted.

Theorem is_empty_empty : is_empty empty = true.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem is_empty_nonempty : q v,
is_empty (enq q v) = false.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem peek_empty : d,
peek d empty = d.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem peek_nonempty : d q v,
peek d (enq q v) = peek v q.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem deq_empty :
deq empty = empty.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem deq_nonempty : q v,
deq (enq q v) = if is_empty q then q else enq (deq q) v.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

End ListQueue.
Here is an interface and model-based specification for queues. We omit rep_ok from it, because our intended implementation isn't going to require a representation invariant.

Module Type QueueAbs.
Parameter V : Type.
Parameter queue : Type.
Parameter empty : queue.
Parameter is_empty : queue bool.
Parameter enq : queue V queue.
Parameter deq : queue queue.
Parameter peek : V queue V.
Parameter Abs : queue list V.
Axiom empty_relate : Abs empty = [].
Axiom enq_relate : q v, Abs (enq q v) = (Abs q) ++ [v].
Axiom peek_relate : d q, peek d q = hd d (Abs q).
Axiom deq_relate : q, Abs (deq q) = tl (Abs q).
End QueueAbs.

#### Exercise: 3 stars, standard (two_list_queue)

Below is an implementation of QueueAbs using two lists. It achieves amortized constant-time performance, improving on the single-list implementation. Verify this implementation.

Module TwoListQueueAbs <: QueueAbs.
Definition V := nat. (* for simplicity *)

Definition queue : Type := list V × list V.

(* (f, b) represents a queue with a front list f and a back list
b, where the back list is stored in reverse order. *)

Definition Abs '((f, b) : queue) : list V :=
f ++ (rev b).

Definition empty : queue :=
([], []).

Definition is_empty (q: queue) :=
match q with
| ([], [])true
| _false
end.

Definition enq '((f, b) : queue) (v : V) :=
(f, v :: b).

Definition deq (q : queue) :=
match q with
| ([], [])([], [])
| ([], b)
match rev b with
| []([], [])
| _ :: f(f, [])
end
| (_ :: f, b)(f, b)
end.

Definition peek (d : V) (q : queue) :=
match q with
| ([], [])d
| ([], b)
match rev b with
| []d
| v :: _v
end
| (v :: _, _)v
end.

Theorem empty_relate : Abs empty = [].
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem enq_relate : q v,
Abs (enq q v) = (Abs q) ++ [v].
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem peek_relate : d q,
peek d q = hd d (Abs q).
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

Theorem deq_relate : q,
Abs (deq q) = tl (Abs q).
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

End TwoListQueueAbs.

# Representation Invariants and Subset Types

In specifications thus far, whenever there was a representation invariant that needed to be enforced we had to add it as a precondition and postcondition for operations. For example, the correctness of the table get operation depended on its table input satisfying rep_ok. We had to write propositions like (t : table), rep_ok t ..., in which we had a type table with lots of values, and we got rid of some of those values by requiring rep_ok to hold of them.
Coq makes it possible to directly express the requirement that values of a type must satisfy a proposition. The type
{x : A | P}
is the type of all values x of type A that satisfy property P, which itself has type A Prop. The notation is deliberately suggestive of set-builder notation used in mathematics. Such types are known as subset types.

## Example: The Even Naturals

We can define the subset type of even natural numbers using the property Nat.Even from the standard library:

Definition even_nat := {x : nat | Nat.Even x}.
But when we try to say that 2 is an even_nat, Coq rejects the definition:

Fail Definition two : even_nat := 2.
The problem is that 2 is a nat, but we haven't proved Nat.Even 2. The proof is easy:

Lemma Even2 : Nat.Even 2.
Proof. 1. reflexivity. Qed.
Now we can provide that proof to convince Coq two is an even_nat. We can do that with function exist, which is suggestive of "there exists an x : A such that P x."

Check exist : {A : Type} (P : A Prop) (x : A), P x {x : A | P x}.

Definition two : even_nat := exist Nat.Even 2 Even2.
Another way of constructing two is to enter Coq's proof scripting mode and use tactics. We saw this briefly in ProofObjects.

Definition two' : even_nat.
Proof.
apply exist with (x := 2).
1. reflexivity.
Defined.
That technique is often useful with subset types, because it helps us more easily build the proof objects, rather than have to write them ourselves.
A value of type even_nat is like a "package" containing the nat and the proof that the nat is even. We have to use functions to extract those components from the package.

Fail Example plus_two : 1 + two = 3.

Check proj1_sig : {A : Type} {P : A Prop} (e : {x : A | P x}), A.

Example plus_two : 1 + proj1_sig two = 3.
Proof. reflexivity. Qed.

Check proj2_sig : {A : Type} {P : A Prop} (e : {x : A | P x}), P (proj1_sig e).

Example Even2' : Nat.Even 2 := proj2_sig two.

## Defining Subset Types

Like nearly everything else we've seen in Coq's logic, subset types are actually defined in the standard library rather than being built-in to the language.

Module SigSandbox.
Subset types are just a syntactic notation for sig:

Inductive sig {A : Type} (P : A Prop) : Type :=
| exist (x : A) : P x sig P.

Notation "{ x : A | P }" := (sig A (fun xP)).
The name sig is short for the Greek capital letter sigma, because subset types are similar to something known in type theory as sigma types, aka dependent sums.
Subset types and existential quantification are quite similar. Recall how the latter is defined:

Inductive ex {A : Type} (P : A Prop) : Prop :=
| ex_intro (x : A) : P x ex P.
The only difference is that sig creates a Type whereas ex creates a Prop. That is, the former is computational in content, whereas the latter is logical. Therefore we can pattern match to recover the witness from a sig, but we cannot do the same with an ex.

Definition proj1_sig {A : Type} {P : A Prop} (e : sig P) : A :=
match e with
| exist _ x _x
end.

Definition proj2_sig {A : Type} {P : A Prop} (e : sig P) : P (proj1_sig e) :=
match e with
| exist _ _ pp
end.

Fail Definition proj1_ex {A : Type} {P : A Prop} (e : ex P) : A :=
match e with
| ex_intro _ x _x
end.

End SigSandbox.

## Example: Vectors

A vector is a list of a known length. Type vector X contains values (xs, n) with a particular representation invariant: n must be the length of xs.

Definition vector (X : Type) :=
{ '(xs, n) : list X × nat | length xs = n }.
The type itself enforces the representation invariant, because a value of type vector X cannot be constructed without first proving that the invariant holds.

#### Exercise: 1 star, standard (a_vector)

Construct any vector of your choice.

Example a_vector : vector nat.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

#### Exercise: 2 stars, standard (vector_cons_correct)

Define a cons operation on vectors. Remember to end with Defined rather than Qed.

Definition vector_cons {X : Type} (x : X) (v : vector X) : vector X.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.
Prove the correctness of your cons operation.

Definition list_of_vector {X : Type} (v : vector X) : list X :=
fst (proj1_sig v).

Theorem vector_cons_correct : (X : Type) (x : X) (v : vector X),
list_of_vector (vector_cons x v) = x :: (list_of_vector v).
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

#### Exercise: 2 stars, standard (vector_app_correct)

Define an append operation on vectors.

Definition vector_app {X : Type} (v1 v2 : vector X) : vector X.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.
Prove the correctness of your append operation.

Theorem vector_app_correct : (X : Type) (v1 v2 : vector X),
list_of_vector (vector_app v1 v2) =
list_of_vector v1 ++ list_of_vector v2.
Proof.
(* FILL IN HERE *) Admitted.

## Using Subset Types to Enforce the BST Invariant

Let's use subset types to reimplement tree-based tables with an elements operation. Previously we had to add rep_ok to the interface and specifications. With subset types we can eliminate that.

Module Type ETableSubset.

Include Table.
Note: no rep_ok anywhere.

Parameter bound : key table bool.
Parameter elements : table list (key × V).

Axiom bound_empty : (k : key),
bound k empty = false.

Axiom bound_set_same : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
bound k (set k v t) = true.

Axiom bound_set_other : (k k' : key) (v : V) (t : table),
k k' bound k' (set k v t) = bound k' t.

Axiom elements_complete : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
bound k t = true
get k t = v
In (k, v) (elements t).

Axiom elements_correct : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
In (k, v) (elements t)
bound k t = true get k t = v.

End ETableSubset.

Module TreeETableSubset (VT : ValType) <: ETableSubset.

Definition V := VT.V.
Definition default := VT.default.
Definition key := nat.
table now is required to enforce BST.
Definition table := { t : tree V | BST t }.
Now instead of proving separate theorems that operations return valid representations, the proofs are "baked in" to the operations.
Definition empty : table.
Proof.
apply (exist _ empty_tree).
apply empty_tree_BST.
Defined.
Now we insert a projection to get to the tree.
Definition get (k : key) (t : table) : V :=
lookup default k (proj1_sig t).

Definition set (k : key) (v : V) (t : table) : table.
Proof.
destruct t as [t Ht].
apply (exist _ (insert k v t)).
apply insert_BST. assumption.
Defined.

Definition bound (k : key) (t : table) : bool :=
SearchTree.bound k (proj1_sig t).

Definition elements (t : table) : list (key × V) :=
elements (proj1_sig t).

Theorem get_empty_default: (k : key),
get k empty = default.
Proof.
apply lookup_empty.
Qed.
Now the rest of the proofs require minor modifications to destruct the table to get the tree and the representation invariant, and use the latter where needed.

Theorem get_set_same: (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
get k (set k v t) = v.
Proof.
intros. unfold get, set.
destruct t as [t Hbst]. simpl.
apply lookup_insert_eq.
Qed.

Theorem get_set_other: (k k' : key) (v : V) (t : table),
k k' get k' (set k v t) = get k' t.
Proof.
intros. unfold get, set.
destruct t as [t Hbst]. simpl.
apply lookup_insert_neq. assumption.
Qed.

Theorem bound_empty : (k : key),
bound k empty = false.
Proof.
reflexivity.
Qed.

Theorem bound_set_same : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
bound k (set k v t) = true.
Proof.
intros k v t. unfold bound, set.
destruct t as [t Hbst]. simpl in ×.
induction t; inv Hbst; bdall.
Qed.

Theorem bound_set_other : (k k' : key) (v : V) (t : table),
k k' bound k' (set k v t) = bound k' t.
Proof.
intros k k' v t Hneq. unfold bound, set.
destruct t as [t Hbst]. simpl in ×.
induction t; inv Hbst; bdall.
Qed.

Theorem elements_complete : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
bound k t = true
get k t = v
In (k, v) (elements t).
Proof.
intros k v t Hbound Hlookup.
pose proof SearchTree.elements_complete as Hcomplete.
unfold elements_complete_spec in Hcomplete.
apply Hcomplete with default; try assumption.
destruct t as [t Hbst]. assumption.
Qed.

Theorem elements_correct : (k : key) (v : V) (t : table),
In (k, v) (elements t)
bound k t = true get k t = v.
Proof.
intros k v t. simpl. intros Hin.
pose proof SearchTree.elements_correct as Hcorrect.
unfold elements_correct_spec in Hcorrect.
apply Hcorrect; try assumption.
destruct t as [t Hbst]. assumption.
Qed.

End TreeETableSubset.

#### Exercise: 4 stars, advanced (ListsETable)

Implement ETableSubset using association lists that are not permitted to contain duplicate keys. Enforce that representation invariant with a subset type. Note that you do not have to keep the lists in a sorted order. The implementation of elements should therefore just be quite easy: just return the association list. The implementation of set, though, will have to be a linear-time operation.

(* Do not modify the following line: *)
Definition manual_grade_for_ListsETable : option (nat×string) := None.

(* 2020-08-07 17:08 *)