The last big thing in neptune that I haven’t written about is the static type system. We’re not actually 100% done with it yet — the design is mostly done but there is still a few late additions that we seem to agree are good ideas but that we haven’t implemented yet. I think we’re far enough, though, that I can give a pretty accurate overview.
The way the type system in neptune came about is kind of unusual. Neptune descends from smalltalk which is not statically typed, but an important goal in the design of the language was to make it look familiar to C and C++ programmers. If you look at these two versions of the same program:
int gcd(int a, int b) {
while (a != 0) {
int c = a;
a = b % a;
b = c;
}
return b;
}
and
gcd(a, b) {
while (a != 0) {
var c = a;
a = b % a;
b = c;
}
return b;
}
the first program looks just like C (because that’s what it is) and the second one looks sort of C-ish but also pretty different. The only difference between the two programs is, of course, that one has type annotations and the other one doesn’t. When we set out to design neptune there was really no question: if we wanted it to look like C, we had to have a static type system. That is not to say that this was the only reason to have a static type system, there are plenty of very good reasons for that, but it is the reason why not having a type system was never an option. Besides the syntax, the most important reasons were that it allows you to write documentation that can be understood and checked by the compiler which again enables much better tool support. The most important non-reasons were optimization security — they were basically irrelevant in the design.
So, what’s the neptune type system like? Well, first of all it’s an optional type system. This means that you are never required to specify a type for anything. For instance, the two gcd programs above are both legal neptune code1. Basically, we want the type system to be there as a service that you can use if you want to but which doesn’t impose itself on you. From a “genealogical” viewpoint, it is closely related to the Strongtalk type system for smalltalk.
The examples above demonstrate the type syntax. If you use type annotations the syntax is the same as in the C language family. If you don’t use type annotations you either just leave the type out, as with return types and parameters, or use the keyword var, as with local variables. In some cases, for instance method parameters, you can do both.
The type system is based on the concept of protocols, which is smalltalk for what most people know as “interfaces”. A protocol is simply a collection of methods:
protocol SimpleOutputStream {
void write(int b);
void flush();
void close();
}
Unlike most statically typed object-oriented languages, including Java and C#, neptune does not have class types. Class types are a Bad Thing because they not only specify the interface of an object but also dictate how the object must be implemented, breaking encapsulation.
There are two ways to define a protocol. One way is to write it directly, as the SimpleOutputStream example above. Also, whenever you define a class you automatically get a protocol with the same name. That might sound confusing but in practice it isn’t. Protocols work much the same way as interfaces, and protocols defined explicitly work exactly the same way as protocols defined by classes. For instance, you are free to the protocol of a class without subclassing it:
class MyString is String {
...
}
In this declaration, “is String” means that MyString implements the protocol of String, not that it extends String — the superclass of MyString is in this case Object. To create a subclass of String you would write
class MyString: String {
...
}
A class can extend one other class but implement an arbitrary number of protocols.
If you use String as the type of a variable it’s usually safe to think of it as if the variable can contain instances of String. But that’s is not accurate in general: the variable can actually contain any object that implements String‘s protocol. Neptune has no way to express that a variable can only contain instances of a particular class.
Programs can dynamically test whether or not an object supports a particular protocol by using the is operator:
if (obj is String) ...
One of the things we haven’t implemented yet but seem to agree is a good idea is to combine this with a limited form of dependent types. In most other languages, for instance Java, the compiler doesn’t “remember” instanceof checks:
if (obj instanceof String) {
label.setText(obj); // illegal: obj not String
}
The compiler doesn’t recognize that you only enter the body of the if if obj is a String — instead, you have to insert a cast:
if (obj instanceof String) {
String str = (String) obj;
label.setText(str);
}
In neptune, we plan to allow the compiler to automatically remember extra type information about local variables after is checks, something that will in many cases make casts unnecessary:
if (obj is String) {
label.setText(obj); // okay, obj is a String
}
In a language like Java that might make programs harder to understand, since the runtime behavior of the program can be affected if the compiler gains more type information. In neptune all it does is avoid unnecessary type warnings, since the runtime behavior of a program is not affected by static types.
This leads me to another aspect: type warnings. In neptune, all problems detected by the type checker are reported as warnings, not errors. It doesn’t matter how wrong you get the types, the program will still compile and run. Well, except for one case: you can’t mix function objects (blocks) and other objects, you have to get the types right there. That is because the compiler needs to be able to track that no references exist to a block after the method that created it returns — otherwise the runtime will die horribly. The philosophy of when to give warnings and errors is simple: we only give errors in a program if we can’t give meaning to the program, otherwise we give warnings. You won’t, for instance, see errors on unreachable code or other such nonsense. You can configure the IDE to give errors instead of warnings but that’s not the default.
Neptune’s static type system is “weak”. Even if x has type int there is no guarantee that it can only contain integers:
var my_string = "blah";
int x = my_string;
int y = x + 18;
In the second line an object of an unknown type is assigned to an integer-typed variable. That is perfectly legal and does not cause a warning so this code will compile without issuing any errors or warnings but will probably fail at runtime in the third line when adding an integer to a string. That doesn’t mean that you can use this to break the runtime. The runtime is strongly typed so no matter how wrong you get the static types it will survive. You might ask why we don’t add runtime checks to catch these situations but that is potentially expensive and it’s probably not worth the trouble. We could also add warnings if we’re not sure that an assignment is safe, but that would generate warnings whenever untyped code called typed code, which goes against the principle that the type system should never impose itself on you if you decide not to use it. Personally, this has never been a problem for me, not even once.
The other thing we’ve discussed and seem to agree upon but haven’t implemented yet are nullable types. By default all types contain the null value:
String str = null; // legal
But often a value is not actually supposed to be null. Nullable types allow you to express this:
String! str = null; // illegal
String? str = null; // legal
String str = null; // legal
The type String! does not allow null whereas String? does. The type String also allows null but is different from String? in that Strings are completely unchecked whereas using a String? in place of a String! without a null check causes a warning.
Ok, I think that’s enough about types for now. There are still interesting details about the type system that I haven’t written about — protocol objects, the void type, etc. — but that will have to wait.
1In case you were wondering, int is not a basic type in neptune — neptune has no basic types. It is just a convenient shorthand for the type Integer.