blag/pages/posts/2019-09-22-amulet-records.md

---
title: "A Quickie: Manipulating Records in Amulet"
date: September 22, 2019
maths: true
---

Amulet, unlike some [other languages], has records figured out. Much like
in ML (and PureScript), they are their own, first-class entities in the
language as opposed to being syntax sugar for defining a product
constructor and projection functions.

### Records are good

Being entities in the language, it's logical to characterize them by
their introduction and elimination judgements[^1].

Records are introduced with record literals:

$$
\frac{
  \Gamma \vdash \overline{e \downarrow \tau}
}{
  \Gamma \vdash \{ \overline{\mathtt{x} = e} \} \downarrow \{ \overline{\mathtt{x} : \tau} \}
}
$$

And eliminated by projecting a single field:

$$
\frac{
  \Gamma \vdash r \downarrow \{ \alpha | \mathtt{x} : \tau \}
}{
  \Gamma \vdash r.\mathtt{x} \uparrow \tau
}
$$

Records also support monomorphic update:

$$
\frac{
      \Gamma \vdash r \downarrow \{ \alpha | \mathtt{x} : \tau \}
\quad \Gamma \vdash e \downarrow \tau
}{
  \Gamma \vdash \{ r\ \mathtt{with\ x} = e \} \downarrow \{ \alpha | \mathtt{x} : \tau \}
}
$$

### Records are.. kinda bad?

Unfortunately, the rather minimalistic vocabulary for talking about
records makes them slightly worthless. There's no way to extend a
record, or to remove a key; Changing the type of a key is also
forbidden, with the only workaround being enumerating all of the keys
you _don't_ want to change.

And, rather amusingly, given the trash-talking I pulled in the first
paragraph, updating nested records is still a nightmare.

```amulet
> let my_record = { x = 1, y = { z = 3 } }
my_record : { x : int, y : { z : int } }
> { my_record with y = { my_record.y with z = 4 } }
_ = { x = 1, y = { z = 4 } }
```

Yikes. Can we do better?

### An aside: Functional Dependencies

Amulet recently learned how to cope with [functional dependencies].
Functional dependencies extend multi-param type classes by allowing the
programmer to restrict the relationships between parameters. To
summarize it rather terribly:

```amulet
(* an arbitrary relationship between types *)
class r 'a 'b
(* a function between types *)
class f 'a 'b | 'a -> 'b
(* a one-to-one mapping *)
class o 'a 'b | 'a -> 'b, 'b -> 'a
```

### Never mind, records are good

As of [today], Amulet knows the magic `row_cons` type class, inspired by
[PureScript's class of the same name].

```amulet
class
    row_cons 'record ('key : string) 'type 'new
  | 'record 'key 'type -> 'new (* 1 *)
  , 'new 'key -> 'record 'type (* 2 *)
begin
  val extend_row : forall 'key -> 'type -> 'record -> 'new
  val restrict_row : forall 'key -> 'new -> 'type * 'record
end
```

This class has built-in solving rules corresponding to the two
functional dependencies:

1. If the original `record`, the `key` to be inserted, and its
   `type` are all known, then the `new` record can be solved for;
2. If both the `key` that was inserted, and the `new` record, it is
   possible to solve for the old `record` and the `type` of the `key`.

Note that rule 2 almost lets `row_cons` be solved for in reverse. Indeed, this is expressed by the type of `restrict_row`, which discovers both the `type` and the original `record`.

Using the `row_cons` class and its magical methods...

1. Records can be extended:
```amulet
> Amc.extend_row @"foo" true { x = 1 }
_ : { foo : bool, x : int } =
  { foo = true, x = 1 }
```
2. Records can be restricted:
```amulet
> Amc.restrict_row @"x" { x = 1 }
_ : int * { } = (1, { x = 1 })
```

And, given [a suitable framework of optics], records can be updated
nicely:

```amulet
> { x = { y = 2 } } |> (r @"x" <<< r @"y") ^~ succ
_ : { x : { y : int } } =
  { x = { y = 3 } }
```

### God, those are some ugly types

It's worth pointing out that making an optic that works for all fields,
parametrised by a type-level string, is not easy or pretty, but it is
work that only needs to be done once.

```ocaml
type optic 'p 'a 's <- 'p 'a 'a -> 'p 's 's

class
     Amc.row_cons 'r 'k 't 'n
  => has_lens 'r 'k 't 'n
  | 'k 'n -> 'r 't
begin
  val rlens : strong 'p => proxy 'k -> optic 'p 't 'n
end

instance
    Amc.known_string 'key
  * Amc.row_cons 'record 'key 'type 'new
  => has_lens 'record 'key 'type 'new
begin
  let rlens _ =
    let view r =
      let (x, _) = Amc.restrict_row @'key r
      x
    let set x r =
      let (_, r') = Amc.restrict_row @'key r
      Amc.extend_row @'key x r'
    lens view set
end

let r
  : forall 'key -> forall 'record 'type 'new 'p.
     Amc.known_string 'key
   * has_lens 'record 'key 'type 'new
   * strong 'p
  => optic 'p 'type 'new =
  fun x -> rlens @'record (Proxy : proxy 'key) x
```

---

Sorry for the short post, but that's it for today.

---

[^1]: Record fields $\mathtt{x}$ are typeset in monospaced font to make
it apparent that they are unfortunately not first-class in the language,
but rather part of the syntax. Since Amulet's type system is inherently
bidirectional, the judgement $\Gamma \vdash e \uparrow \tau$ represents
type inference while $\Gamma \vdash e \downarrow \tau$ stands for type
checking.

[functional dependencies]: https://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~mpj/pubs/fundeps.html
[other languages]: https://haskell.org
[today]: https://github.com/tmpim/amulet/pull/168
[PureScript's class of the same name]: https://pursuit.purescript.org/builtins/docs/Prim.Row#t:Cons
[a suitable framework of optics]: /static/profunctors.ml.html