Affiliations: Project MetaSoft, Institute of Computer Science, Polish Academy of Sciences, PKiN P.O. Box 22, 00-901 Warsaw, Poland
Note: [*] An early version of this paper has appeared in: VDM’88, VDM – The Way Ahead, Proc. of 2nd VDM-Europe Symposium, Dublin, Ireland, September 1988, R.Bloomfield, L.Marshall, R.Jones (Eds.), LNCS 328, Springer-Verlag 1988.
Abstract: Partial functions, hence also partial predicates, cannot be avoided in algorithms. However, in spite of the fact that partial functions have been formally introduced into the theory of software very early, partial predicates are still not quite commonly recognized. In many programming- and software-specification languages partial Boolean expressions are treated in a rather simplistic way: the evaluation of a Boolean sub-expression to an error leads to the evaluation of the hosting Boolean expression to an error and, in the consequence, to the abortion of the whole program. This technique is known as an eager evaluation of expressions. A more practical approach to the evaluation of expressions – gaining more interest today among both theoreticians and programming-language designers – is lazy evaluation. Lazily evaluated Boolean expressions correspond to (non-strict) three-valued predicates where the third value represents both an error and an undefinedness. On the semantic ground this leads to a three-valued propositional calculus, three-valued quantifiers and an appropriate logic. This paper is a survey-essay devoted to the discussion and the comparison of a few three-valued propositional and predicate calculi and to the discussion of the author’s claim that a two-valued logic, rather than a three-valued logic, is suitable for the treatment of programs with three-valued Boolean expressions. The paper is written in a formal but not in a formalized style. All discussion is carried on a semantic ground. We talk about predicates (functions) and a semantic consequence relation rather than about expressions and inference rules. However, the paper is followed by more formalized works which carry our discussion further on a formalized ground, and where corresponding formal logics are constructed and discussed.
