PLT Redex is a tool for modeling programming languages, operational semantics, type systems, program analyses, and so forth. It is designed after the notation established by research papers, and the existing educational material for PLT Redex targets experienced programming-language researchers. But when I started to learn PLT Redex, I was new to the field, so I struggled both with the research papers and with the education material. Through the struggle, I noticed that this was a two-way street: reading papers helped me to understand PLT Redex, but perhaps more importantly, understanding PLT Redex helped me to read papers. I became more fluent in the notation, and could implement the theory in the papers more easily. PLT Redex was lowering the cost of experimenting, and supporting the most effective kind of reading: active reading.
With time, I realized that there is no magic in PLT Redex—it is just functional programming with pattern matching. I wish someone had told me that without bringing up Greek letters and jargon, and this is what I want to do to fellow programmers who are trying to break into programming-language theory. I write this article from the other side of the bump hoping to smooth the path for those that follow.
We will (ab)use PLT Redex to play a game of Peg Solitaire. Through this simple board game we will explore functional programming, pattern matching, contract verification, nondeterministic computation, visualization, typesetting, test generation, and so forth. This is a fun exercise of repurposing a tool for a task beyond its intended design, and it is a first step toward the virtuous cycle between knowing PLT Redex and reading papers.
We begin with the minimum to go from nothing to playing the game as quickly as possible. We then start over and redo everything, going into more detail. We model Peg Solitaire elements (for example, pegs and boards) as terms and match them against patterns. We formalize the notion of which terms represent Peg Solitaire elements with a language and define metafunctions on this language. We model moves and the winning condition in Peg Solitaire with forms capable of nondeterministic computation: reduction relations, predicate relations, and judgment forms. We play the game with the visualization tools. We glance at other features, including test generation and typesetting. Finally, we discuss limitations and related work, and conclude.