Computing Reviews
Today's Issue Hot Topics Search Browse Recommended My Account Log In
Review Help
Search
A semantics comparison workbench for a concurrent, asynchronous, distributed programming language
Corrodi C., Heu&bgr;ner A., Poskitt C. Formal Aspects of Computing30 (1):163-192,2018.Type:Article
Date Reviewed: May 23 2018

Changes in distributed-system runtime support in response to changes in technological and operational circumstances may also change the services offered to supported systems. The graph-based semantics comparison workbench described in this paper determines how runtime support changes may affect supported distributed systems. The workbench is easy to establish and flexible over a wide range of changes, providing an intuitive interpretation of both the system under analysis and potential behavioral changes.

Graphs model system abstractions. Rewrite rules specify subgraph matches and, if matching occurs, transformations to reconfigure the graph. Other rules can detect deadlock or other safety-property violations. Graph and rule modules help generate various system models and execution behaviors, and parameters help generate variation within a system. The graph-based model is refined into a toolchain to demonstrate the principles involved as well as their practicality.

As a benchmark, the workbench analyzed several programs written in a message-based distributed object-oriented system. Under analysis, runtime systems differing in execution models reveal behavioral changes resulting in deadlock and other inconsistencies in program execution. Analysis data presented suggest modest increases in, and efficient traversal of, state spaces.

There is much going on in this paper, and much of it is somewhat esoteric, particularly graph-based concurrency analysis. The paper is self-contained, but that’s not as helpful as it might seem. The writing is good, but there is a lot of it, and some is not as finely woven as it could be. The bibliography has a good selection of background material, as well as the more expected references.

Reviewer:  R. Clayton Review #: CR146042 (1808-0436)
Bookmark and Share
  Reviewer Selected
 
 
Mechanical Verification (F.3.1 ... )
 
 
Programmer Workbench (D.2.2 ... )
 
 
Concurrent Programming (D.1.3 )
 
 
Object-Oriented Programming (D.1.5 )
 
 
Software/ Program Verification (D.2.4 )
 
Would you recommend this review?
yes
no
Other reviews under "Mechanical Verification": Date
Fast automatic liveness analysis of hierarchical parallel systems
Rohrich J.  Programming Languages and System Design (, Dresden, East Germany,271983. Type: Proceedings
Feb 1 1985
Mechanical proofs about computer programs
Good D.  Mathematical logic and programming languages (, London, UK,751985. Type: Proceedings
Feb 1 1986
The characterization problem for Hoare logics
Clarke E.  Mathematical logic and programming languages (, London, UK,1061985. Type: Proceedings
Jun 1 1986
more...

E-Mail This Printer-Friendly
Send Your Comments
Contact Us
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.   Copyright 1999-2024 ThinkLoud®
Terms of Use
| Privacy Policy