The concept of ‘undone science’ emerged in the 2010s in research in social sciences at the intersection of studies on social movements and of science and technology studies. It refers to research questions that are neglected, ignored, or left unfunded, even though they deserve to be explored. The aim of this special issue is to apply this concept to computer science, by examining whether the way this discipline is structured (including its sociological, economic, and political dimensions), as well as the paradigms that shape it, make it possible to identify epistemological and ethical questions that are crucial for its development and conception.

The logical principles of focalisation and polarisation can be used to design well-behaved term syntaxes for sequent calculus, which play a role as meta-languages for describing effectful computation. On the semantics side, this corresponds to an axiomatic and polarised notion of model of computation stated in terms of adjunctions over non-associative categories. In this paper, we study the special and delicate cases of resource and effect modalities in a general intuitionistic and linear setting: an exponential comonad $!$ (refining $\square$) and a strong monad $◊$. The starting point of our contribution is noticing that the completeness for a polarised syntax for $!$ and $◊$ with respect to (co)monads in linear call-by-push-value models can be achieved if we move to relative (co)monads: more precisely, comonads relative to $\downarrow$ (the positive shift functor) for $!$ and monads relative to $\uparrow$ (the negative shift functor) for $◊$. These specialisations of the concept of relative (co)monad to call-by-push-value adjunctions recently appeared. Yet the syntax we present arose from proof-theoretic consideration, without the link with relative (co)monads being noticed at the time. Our first remark is thus that (co)monads relative to a call-by-push-value adjunction have been motivated previously from a proof-theoretic perspective in the context of focalisation, which also provides a meta-language for these concepts in an effectful setting. We carry out the study of these modalities from the axiomatic, non-associative point of view. We recall the notion of adjunction over non-associative categories, and establish correspondence results between this notion of adjunction and that of relative adjunction. This correspondence is then extended to linear-non-linear and strong versions of adjunctions as needed to model $!$ and $◊$.

In this short paper, we advocate for the idea that continuation-based intermediate languages correspond to intermediate logics. The goal of intermediate languages is to serve as a basis for compiler intermediate representations, allowing to represent expressive program transformations for optimisation and compilation, while preserving the properties that make programs compilable efficiently in the first place, such as the “stackability” of continuations. Intermediate logics are logics between intuitionistic and classical logic in terms of provability. Second-class continuations used in CPS-based intermediate languages correspond to a classical modal logic S4 with the added restriction that implications may only return modal types. This indeed corresponds to an intermediate logic, owing to the Gödel-McKinsey-Tarski theorem which states the intuitionistic nature of the modal fragment of S4. We introduce a three-kinded polarised sequent calculus for S4, together with an operational machine model that separates a heap from a stack. With this model we study a stackability property for the modal fragment of S4.

In the spirit of the Curry-Howard correspondence between proofs and programs, we define and study a syntax and semantics for classical logic equipped with a computationally involutive negation, using a polarised effect calculus, the linear classical L -calculus. A main challenge in designing a denotational semantics for the calculus is to accommodate both call-by-value and call-by-name evaluation strategies, which leads to a failure of associativity of composition. In order to tackle this issue, we define a notion of adjunction between graph morphisms on non-associative categories, which we use to formulate polarized and non-associative notions of symmetric monoidal closed duploid and of dialogue duploid. We show that they provide a direct style counterpart to adjunction models: linear effect adjunctions for the (linear) call-by-push-value calculus and dialogue chiralities for linear continuations, respectively. In particular, we show that the syntax of the linear classical L -calculus can be interpreted in any dialogue duploid, and that it defines in fact a syntactic dialogue duploid. As an application, we establish, by semantic as well as syntactic means, the Hasegawa-Thielecke theorem, which states that the notions of central map and of thunkable map coincide in any dialogue duploid (in particular, for any double negation monad on a symmetric monoidal category).

We analyse the problem of combining linearity, effects, and exceptions, in abstract models of programming languages, as the issue of providing some kind of strength for a monad $𝑇(-\oplus 𝐸)$ in a linear setting. We consider in particular for T the allocation monad, which we introduce to model and study resource-safety properties. We apply these results to a series of two linear effectful calculi for which we establish their resource-safety properties. The first calculus is a linear (optionally ordered) call-by-push-value language with two allocation effects $\text{𝐧𝐞𝐰}$ and $\text{𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞}$. The resource-safety properties follow from the linear and ordered character of the typing rules. We then integrate exceptions with linearity and effects by adjoining default destruction actions to types, as inspired by C++/Rust destructors. We see destructors as objects $𝛿:𝐴\to 𝑇𝐼$ in the slice category over $𝑇𝐼$. This construction gives rise to a second calculus, the resource call-by-push-value, featuring exceptions and destructors, and whose weakening and exchange rules perform side-effects. It is therefore affine at the level of types but ordered at the level of derivations. As in C++ and Rust, a “move” operation—the side-effecting exchange rule—is necessary for releasing resources in random order, as opposed to LIFO order.

We present a resource-management model for ML-style programming languages, designed to be compatible with the OCaml philosophy and runtime model. This is a proposal to extend the OCaml language with destructors, move semantics, and resource polymorphism, to improve its safety, efficiency, interoperability, and expressiveness. It builds on the ownership-and-borrowing models of systems programming languages (Cyclone, C++11, Rust) and on linear types in functional programming (Linear Lisp, Clean, Alms). It continues a synthesis of resources from systems programming and resources in linear logic initiated by Baker. It is a combination of many known and some new ideas. On the novel side, it highlights the good mathematical structure of Stroustrup’s “Resource acquisition is initialisation” (RAII) idiom for resource management based on destructors, a notion sometimes confused with finalizers, and builds on it a notion of resource polymorphism, inspired by polarisation in proof theory, that mixes C++‘s RAII and a tracing garbage collector (GC). The proposal targets a new spot in the design space, with an automatic and predictable resource-management model, at the same time based on lightweight and expressive language abstractions. It is backwards-compatible: current code is expected to run with the same performance, the new abstractions fully combine with the current ones, and it supports a resource-polymorphic extension of libraries. It does so with only a few additions to the runtime, and it integrates with the current GC implementation. It is also compatible with the upcoming multicore extension, and suggests that the Rust model for eliminating data-races applies. Interesting questions arise for a safe and practical type system, many of which have already been thoroughly investigated in the languages and prototypes Cyclone, Rust, and Alms.