Effect handlers can be composed by applying them sequentially, each handling some operations and leaving other operations uninterpreted in the syntax tree. However, the semantics of composed handlers can be subtle—it is well known that different orders of composing handlers can lead to drastically different semantics. Determining the correct order of composition is a non-trivial task. To alleviate this problem, this paper presents a systematic way of deriving sufficient conditions on handlers for their composite to correctly handle combinations, such as the sum and the tensor, of the effect theories separately handled. These conditions are solely characterised by the clauses for relevant operations of the handlers, and are derived by fusing two handlers into one using a form of fold/build fusion and continuation-passing style transformation. As case studies, the technique is applied to commutative and distributive interaction of handlers to obtain a series of results about the interaction of common handlers: (a) equations respected by each handler are preserved after handler composition; (b) handling mutable state before any handler gives rise to a semantics in which state operations are commutative with any operations from the latter handler; (c) handling the writer effect and mutable state in either order gives rise to a correct handler of the commutative combination of these two theories.

We compare the expressive power of three programming abstractions for user-defined computational effects: Plotkin and Pretnar’s effect handlers, Filinski’s monadic reflection, and delimited control. This comparison allows a precise discussion about the relative expressiveness of each programming abstraction. It also demonstrates the sensitivity of the relative expressiveness of user-defined effects to seemingly orthogonal language features. We present three calculi, one per abstraction, extending Levy’s call-by-push-value. For each calculus, we present syntax, operational semantics, a natural type-and-effect system, and, for effect handlers and monadic reflection, a set-theoretic denotational semantics. We establish their basic metatheoretic properties: safety, termination, and, where applicable, soundness and adequacy. Using Felleisen’s notion of a macro translation, we show that these abstractions can macro express each other, and show which translations preserve typeability. We use the adequate finitary set-theoretic denotational semantics for the monadic calculus to show that effect handlers cannot be macro expressed while preserving typeability either by monadic reflection or by delimited control. Our argument fails with simple changes to the type system such as polymorphism and inductive types. We supplement our development with a mechanised Abella formalisation.

We develop a theory of abstract syntax with variable binding. To every binding signature we associate a category of models consisting of variable sets endowed with compatible algebra and substitution structures. The syntax generated by the signature is the initial model. This gives a notion of initial algebra semantics encompassing the traditional one; besides compositionality, it automatically verifies the semantic substitution lemma.