Inλ-calculus, the strategy of leftmost reduction (“call-by-name”) is known to have good mathematical properties; in particular, it always terminates when applied to a normalizable term. On the other hand, with this strategy, the argument of a function is re-evaluated at each time it is used.To avoid this drawback, we define the notion of “storage operator”, for each data type. IfT is a storage operator for integers, for example, let us replace the evaluation, by leftmost reduction, ofϕτ (whereτ is an integer, (...) andϕ anyλ-term) by the evaluation oftτϕ. Then, this computation is the same as the following: first computeτ up to some reduced formτ 0, and then applyϕ toτ 0. So, we have simulated “call-by-value” evaluation within the strategy of leftmost reduction.The main theorem of the paper (Corollary of Theorem 4.1) shows that, in a second orderλ-calculus, using Gödel's translation of classical intuitionistic logic, we can find a very simple type (or specification) for storage operators. Thus, it gives a way to get such operators, which is to prove this type in second order intuitionistic predicate calculus. (shrink)

, which uses the intuitionistic propositional calculus, with the only connective →. It is very important, because the well known Curry-Howard correspondence between proofs and programs was originally discovered with it, and because it enjoys the normalization property: every typed term is strongly normalizable. It was extended to second order intuitionistic logic, in 1970, by J.-Y. Girard [4], under the name of system F, still with the normalization property.More recently, in 1990, the Curry-Howard correspondence was extended to classical logic, following (...) Felleisen and Griffin [6] who discovered that the law of Peirce corresponds to control instructions in functional programming languages. It is interesting to notice that, as early as 1972, Clint and Hoare [1] had made an analogous remark for the law of excluded middle and controlled jump instructions in imperative languages.There are now many type systems which are based on classical logic; among the best known are the system LC of J.-Y. Girard [5] and the λμ-calculus of M. Parigot [11]. We shall use below a system closely related to the latter, called the λ c -calculus [8, 9]. Both systems use classical second order logic and have the normalization property.In the sequel, we shall extend the λ c -calculus to the Zermelo-Frænkel set theory. The main problem is due to the axiom of extensionality. To overcome this difficulty, we first give the axioms of ZF in a suitable (equivalent) form, which we call ZF ɛ. (shrink)

We describe here a simple method in order to obtain programs from proofs in second-order classical logic. Then we extend to classical logic the results about storage operators proved by Krivine for intuitionistic logic. This work generalizes previous results of Parigot.

Introduction. Il est bien connu que la correspondance de Curry-Howard permet d'associer un programme, sous la forme d'un λ-terme, à toute preuve intuitionniste, formalisée dans le calcul des prédicats du second ordre. Cette correspondance a été étendue, assez récemment, à la logique classique moyennant une extension convenable du λ-calcul. Chaque théorème formalisé en logique du second ordre correspond donc à une spécification de programme.Il se pose alors le problème, en général tout à fait non trivial, de trouver la spécification associée (...) à un théorème donné; autrement dit, de déterminer le comportement opérationnel commun aux λ-termes associés aux diverses démonstrations formelles du théorème considéré.Cette question est résolue ici pour le théorème de complétude de la logique classique.La première étape consiste à formaliser convenablement ce théorème en logique du second ordre. Ce travail est fait complètement dans la section 1. Il a comme sous-produit, peut-être inattendu, de montrer que ce théorème est prouvable en logique intuitionniste du second ordre. Ceci, toutefois, à condition d'introduire une légère variante de la notion de modèle, en admettant un modèle supplémentaire trivial, où toute formule est satisfaite.On notera, à ce sujet, que des preuves intuitionnistes du théorème de complétude de la logique intuitionniste, utilisant des variantes de la notion de modele de Kripke, ont été données par H. Friedman [7] et W. Veldman [8]. On remarquera également qu'un argument de G. Kreisel [2] montre que le théorème de complétude habituel de la logique intuitionniste n'a pas de preuve intuitionniste. (shrink)