Research into abstract datatypes and information hiding brought existential types into programming languages. Making a datatype abstract hides info about that type, so a client of that type cannot abuse it. Say you've got a reference to an object... some languages allow you to cast that reference to a reference to bytes and do anything you want to that piece of memory. For purposes of guaranteeing behavior of a program, it's useful for a language to enforce that you only act on the reference to the object via the methods the designer of the object provides. You know the type exists, but nothing more.

看到的: 抽象类型有存在类型，MITCHEL和PLOTKIN http://theory.stanford.edu/~jcm/papers/mitch-plotkin-88.pdf

直接回答你的问题:

对于通用类型，T的使用必须包括类型参数x。例如T<String>或T<Integer>。对于存在类型使用T不包括该类型参数，因为它是未知的或不相关的-只需使用T(或在Java中T<?>)。

进一步的信息:

通用/抽象类型和存在类型是对象/函数的消费者/客户和它的生产者/实现之间的二元视角。一方看到的是普遍类型，另一方看到的是存在类型。

在Java中，你可以定义一个泛型类:

public class MyClass<T> {
   // T is existential in here
   T whatever; 
   public MyClass(T w) { this.whatever = w; }

   public static MyClass<?> secretMessage() { return new MyClass("bazzlebleeb"); }
}

// T is universal from out here
MyClass<String> mc1 = new MyClass("foo");
MyClass<Integer> mc2 = new MyClass(123);
MyClass<?> mc3 = MyClass.secretMessage();

From the perspective of a client of MyClass, T is universal because you can substitute any type for T when you use that class and you must know the actual type of T whenever you use an instance of MyClass From the perspective of instance methods in MyClass itself, T is existential because it doesn't know the real type of T In Java, ? represents the existential type - thus when you are inside the class, T is basically ?. If you want to handle an instance of MyClass with T existential, you can declare MyClass<?> as in the secretMessage() example above.

存在类型有时用于隐藏某些东西的实现细节，如在其他地方讨论的那样。Java版本如下所示:

public class ToDraw<T> {
    T obj;
    Function<Pair<T,Graphics>, Void> draw;
    ToDraw(T obj, Function<Pair<T,Graphics>, Void>
    static void draw(ToDraw<?> d, Graphics g) { d.draw.apply(new Pair(d.obj, g)); }
}

// Now you can put these in a list and draw them like so:
List<ToDraw<?>> drawList = ... ;
for(td in drawList) ToDraw.draw(td);

要正确地捕获这一点有点棘手，因为我正在假装使用某种函数式编程语言，而Java不是。但这里的重点是，您正在捕获某种状态加上对该状态进行操作的函数列表，并且您不知道状态部分的真实类型，但函数知道，因为它们已经与该类型匹配。

Now, in Java all non-final non-primitive types are partly existential. This may sound strange, but because a variable declared as Object could potentially be a subclass of Object instead, you cannot declare the specific type, only "this type or a subclass". And so, objects are represented as a bit of state plus a list of functions that operate on that state - exactly which function to call is determined at runtime by lookup. This is very much like the use of existential types above where you have an existential state part and a function that operates on that state.

在没有子类型和类型转换的静态类型编程语言中，存在类型允许管理不同类型对象的列表。T<Int>的列表不能包含T<Long>。然而，T<?>可以包含T的任何变体，允许将许多不同类型的数据放入列表中，并根据需要将它们全部转换为int(或执行数据结构内部提供的任何操作)。

几乎总是可以将具有存在类型的记录转换为不使用闭包的记录。闭包也是存在类型的，因为它关闭的自由变量对调用者是隐藏的。因此，一种支持闭包但不支持存在类型的语言可以允许您创建闭包，这些闭包共享与放入对象的存在部分相同的隐藏状态。

Research into abstract datatypes and information hiding brought existential types into programming languages. Making a datatype abstract hides info about that type, so a client of that type cannot abuse it. Say you've got a reference to an object... some languages allow you to cast that reference to a reference to bytes and do anything you want to that piece of memory. For purposes of guaranteeing behavior of a program, it's useful for a language to enforce that you only act on the reference to the object via the methods the designer of the object provides. You know the type exists, but nothing more.

看到的: 抽象类型有存在类型，MITCHEL和PLOTKIN http://theory.stanford.edu/~jcm/papers/mitch-plotkin-88.pdf

似乎我来晚了一点，但无论如何，这篇文档增加了关于存在类型是什么的另一种观点，尽管不是特别的语言不可知，这样应该更容易理解存在类型:http://www.cs.uu.nl/groups/ST/Projects/ehc/ehc-book.pdf(第8章)

The difference between a universally and existentially quantified type can be characterized by the following observation: The use of a value with a ∀ quantified type determines the type to choose for the instantiation of the quantified type variable. For example, the caller of the identity function “id :: ∀a.a → a” determines the type to choose for the type variable a for this particular application of id. For the function application “id 3” this type equals Int. The creation of a value with a ∃ quantified type determines, and hides, the type of the quantified type variable. For example, a creator of a “∃a.(a, a → Int)” may have constructed a value of that type from “(3, λx → x)”; another creator has constructed a value with the same type from “(’x’, λx → ord x)”. From a users point of view both values have the same type and are thus interchangeable. The value has a specific type chosen for type variable a, but we do not know which type, so this information can no longer be exploited. This value specific type information has been ‘forgotten’; we only know it exists.

据我所知，这是一种描述接口/抽象类的数学方法。

对于T =∃X {X a;int f (X);｝

对于c#，它可以转换为泛型抽象类型:

abstract class MyType<T>{
    private T a;

    public abstract int f(T x);
}

"存在主义"的意思是有某种类型服从这里定义的规则。

存在类型的值，例如∃x。F(x)是一个包含x类型和F(x)类型值的对。而像∀x这样的多态类型的值。F(x)是一个接受x类型并产生F(x)类型值的函数。在这两种情况下，类型在某个类型构造函数F上关闭。

注意，这个视图混合了类型和值。存在证明是一种类型和一个值。通用证明是由类型(或从类型到值的映射)索引的一整套值。

所以你指定的两种类型的区别如下:

T = ∃X { X a; int f(X); }

这意味着:类型T的值包含名为X的类型、值A:X和函数f:X->int。T类型值的生产者可以为X选择任何类型，而消费者对X一无所知，除了有一个叫做A的例子，并且这个值可以通过将它交给f来转换成int型。换句话说，T类型的值知道如何以某种方式生成int型。我们可以排除中间类型X，然后说

T = int

而普遍量化的则略有不同。

T = ∀X { X a; int f(X); }

这意味着:类型T的值可以给定任何类型X，它将生成一个值A:X，以及一个函数f:X->int，无论X是什么。换句话说:T类型值的消费者可以为X选择任何类型，而T类型值的生产者完全不可能知道X的任何信息，但它必须能够为任何X选择产生一个值a，并能够将这样的值转换为int型。

显然，实现这种类型是不可能的，因为没有程序可以产生所有可以想象的类型的值。除非你允许像null或底部这样的荒谬。

由于存在主义论点是一对，存在主义论点可以通过套用转换为普遍论点。

(∃b. F(b)) -> Int

等于:

∀b. (F(b) -> Int)

前者是二级存在主义。这将导致以下有用的属性:

秩n+1的每一个存在量化类型都是秩n的普遍量化类型。

有一个将存在性转化为共相的标准算法，叫做Skolemization。