• a fully functional lexer
  • support line comment
  • support string
  • full support of symbol lexing
  • negative integer
• parser
  • apply
  • tuple
  • tuple, apply without Paren
  • support string
  • other
  • negative integer
• interpreter
  • qubit management
  • other
• standard library
  • map
  • fold
  • borrow
  • other functions

See ./Example

• ownership

  yes

• aliasing/borrowing

  • aliasing: yes
  • borrowing: add a new standard library function borrow

• high order function (map, filter, etc.)

  map, fold

  also use range to generate a set of indices. classical for loop can be achieved via fold + range

• array vs. tuple (composite system) notation

  use composite system and tuple for qubits, array for classical data

• ⊕ xor (high/low level? Quantum Fourier Transformation? )

  high level, consistent with Q#

• indexing

  when apply index to arrays, the semantic is consistent with classical ones. When applying to composite systems, while the qubit at specified index is retrieved, the original collection is discarded.

• representation of tensor product

  • no literal. use System function (constructor) to construct a composite system.

  • tensor product of unitary matrices is not supported (from syntax level)

• recursion/mutually recursive

  No for now. Very likely yes in the future

• grammar style

  CAML style

• claiming and disposing quantum resources

  do it

• "cloning" qubit (creating entangling qubits with the same state)

  don't use it

• name

  QAL

• call by name

  no, call-by-value

This is a quantum functional programming language, inspired by the theory of Quantum Lambda Calculus developed by Sir Selinger. Since it is a proof-of-concept language experimenting some novel ideas present in the realm, we decide to preserve its simplicity by removing all syntactic sugar and non-critical syntax support that are common to many existing functional PLs.

For example, the following common features are missing:

• anonymous function

  Every function should be declared with a name

• partial application

  You must use a wrapper function to apply some of the arguments

• Boolean data type

  0 means false and 1 means true

• type system

  Types still exist, but there is no way of explicitly declaring a variable as a certain type. Also, application and function signatures don't enforce type checking

• pattern matching

  Actually it supports a subset of CAML style pattern matching

However, it does have good support for quantum data types and qubit operations, which will be discussed in detail in the following sections.

Despite the syntax being similar to classical ML style language, our language is fundamentally different from these.

Due to the presence of no-cloning theorem, we have to redesign even the most basic data structures (for example, tuples and arrays) in order to circumvent the constrains and keep the functional programming semantics in many functions and high order functions.

For instance, consider the following code snippet:

let qubit' = qubit in
...

Unlike classical data assignment, qubit becomes inaccessible after this operation. The reason is that we have to keep track of the references of qubit variables (pointers), so that no quantum variables may point to the same quantum resource.

Otherwise, disastrous scenarios like this may happen:

let q = qubit in
CNOT q qubit

The CNOT gate operates on two same qubits which is unthinkable in quantum computing.

Or something slightly less worse:

let qubit' = X qubit in
let qubit'' = qubit in
...

Since qubit value has been changed since line 1, another access may get a different value than the origin value of qubit. This is especially unacceptable in functional programming since it implies implicit mutable variables.

Therefore we take the approach of linearity, which means no variables are allowed to use twice.

Note that this is quite different as what descried in Sir Selinger's Quantum Lambda Calculus and Quipper language, because we think creating an entangled pair with the same state to imitate the "cloning" operation is not a good idea.

This leads to a profound shift in our language design.

There are 3 types of collections in this language:

Some explanations:

• Arrays cannot include qubits because the no-cloning theorem: Once the qubit system (a subset of the array) evolves via some unitary matrices, the new state exists in the form of function return value and is no longer a subset of the array. This will leave holes in the sequenced data structure, invalidating future enumeration operations.
• Composite system cannot include classical data because it is a data structure specialized for quantum state evolvement.

In addition, there are differences between classical data and qubit:

For the formal definition of this block, please see the source code.

let can be in one of the following forms:

let x = 0 in
...

let id x = x in
...

The basic form is like this:

let a, b = tuple in
...

However, it is also possible to use wildcard

let a, _ = tuple in
...

And even further:

let _, _ = tuple in
...

Note that the in keyword cannot be omitted.

Also, the following syntax is considered invalid:

let (a, b) = tuple in
...

Apart from the aforementioned tuple deconstruction in let binding, it is also possible to use pattern matching in match block.

For the formal definition of this block, please see the source code.

match tuple with
| 0, b, c -> b
| a, 0, _ -> a
| _ -> 0

Note that the language does not enforce type check, so it is possible to write the following code, although its behavior is undefined:

match tuple with
| 1, 2 -> 1
| a, _, _ -> a

It serves the functionality of if block:

match num with
| 0 -> 0
| 1 -> 1

There are some peculiarities:

• the language only supports the pattern matching of tuple and scalar values

• the pattern should not be wrapped in parenthesis.

• the pattern is not recursive. For example:

  match tuple with
  | (_, _), _ -> 0

  Is illegal