Modular reasoning about invariants over shared state with interposed data members

ABSTRACT

Reasoning about object-oriented programs is difficult since such programs usually involve aliasing, and it is not easy to identify the ways objects can relate to each other and thus to confine a program's heap. In this paper, we address this problem in the context of a relationship-based programming language. In relationship-based programming languages, relationships are first-class citizens and allow a precise description of inter-object relationships. Relationships enforce a modularization discipline that is closer to the natural modularity inherent to many problem domains and that yields, as a result, program heaps that are DAGs. We further describe a mechanism, member interposition, that leverages the new modularization discipline and supports encapsulation of fields of shared objects. We have implemented the described modularization discipline and the mechanism of member interposition in the context of Rumer, a relationship-based programming language with support for contract specifications. We discuss the implications of member interposition for the modular verification of object invariants with an example. Relationships and interposed members provide an alternative to ownership type systems.

References

1. A. Albano, G. Ghelli, and R. Orsini. A relationship mechanism for a strongly typed object-oriented database programming language. In 17th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB'91), pages 565--575. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., 1991.
2. S. Balzer, T.R. Gross, and P. Eugster. A relational model of object collaborations and its use in reasoning about relationships. In 21st European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP'07), volume 4609 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 323--346. Springer, 2007.
3. M. Barnett, R. DeLine, M. Fähndrich, K.R.M. Leino, and W. Schulte. Verification of object-oriented programs with invariants. Journal of Object Technology (JOT), 3(6):27--56, 2004.
4. M. Barnett, K.R.M. Leino, and W. Schulte. The Spec# programming system: An overview. In International Workshop on Construction and Analysis of Safe, Secure, and Interoperable Smart Devices (CASSIS'04), volume 3362 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 49--69. Springer, 2004.
5. M. Barnett and D.A. Naumann. Friends need a bit more: Maintaining invariants over shared state. In 7th International Conference on Mathematics of Program Construction (MPC'04), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 54--84. Springer, 2004.
6. D. Bäumer, D. Riehle, W. Siberski, and M. Wulf. The role object pattern. In 4th Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (PLoP'97), 1997.
7. G.M. Bierman, E. Meijer, and M. Torgersen. Lost in translation: Formalizing proposed extensions to Spec#. In 22nd Annual ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA'07), pages 479--498. ACM, 2007.
8. G.M. Bierman and A. Wren. First-class relationships in an object-oriented language. In 19th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP'05), volume 3586 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 262--286. Springer, 2005.
9. C. Boyapati, R. Lee, and M. Rinard. Ownership types for safe programming: Preventing data races and deadlocks. In 17th Annual ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA'02), pages 211--230, New York, NY, USA, 2002. ACM.
10. L. Burdy, Y. Cheon, D.R. Cok, M.D. Ernst, J.R. Kiniry, G.T. Leavens, K.R.M. Leino, and E. Poll. An overview of JML tools and applications. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer (STTT'05), 7(3):212--232, 2005.
11. N.R. Cameron, S. Drossopoulou, J. Noble, and M.J. Smith. Multiple ownership. In 22nd Annual ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA'07), pages 441--460. ACM, 2007.
12. P.P.-S. Chen. The entity-relationship model -- toward a unified view of data. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), 1(1):9--36, March 1976.
13. D.G. Clarke and S. Drossopoulou. Ownership, encapsulation and the disjointness of type and effect. In 17th Annual ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA'02), pages 292--310. ACM, 2002.
14. D.G. Clarke, J.M. Potter, and J. Noble. Ownership types for flexible alias protection. In 13th Annual ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA'98), pages 48--64. ACM, 1998.
15. W. Dietl, S. Drossopoulou, and P. Müller. Generic universe types. In 21st European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP'07), volume 4609 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 28--53. Springer, 2007.
16. I. Jacobson, G. Booch, and J.E. Rumbaugh. The Unified Software Development Process. Addison-Wesley, 1999.
17. G.T. Leavens, A.L. Baker, and C. Ruby. Preliminary design of JML: A behavioral interface specification language for Java. Technical Report 98-06-rev29, Iowa State University, 2006.
18. K.R.M. Leino and P. Müller. Object invariants in dynamic contexts. In 18th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP'04), volume 3086 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 491--516. Springer, 2004.
19. K.R.M. Leino and W. Schulte. Using history invariants to verify observers. In 16th European Symposium on Programming (ESOP'07), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 80--94. Springer, 2007.
20. B. Meyer. Object-Oriented Software Construction. Prentice Hall Professional Technical Reference, 2nd edition, 1997.
21. P. Müller. Modular Specification and Verification of Object-Oriented Programs. PhD thesis, FernUniversität Hagen, 2001.
22. P. Müller, A. Poetzsch-Heffter, and G.T. Leavens. Modular invariants for layered object structures. Science of Computer Programming, 62(3):253--286, 2006.
23. S. Nelson, D.J. Pearce, and J. Noble. First class relationships for OO languages. In 6th International Workshop on Multiparadigm Programming with Object-Oriented Languages, 2008.
24. J. Noble, J. Vitek, and J. Potter. Flexible alias protection. In 12th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP'98), volume 1445 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 158--185. Springer, 1998.
25. K. Østerbye. Design of a class library for association relationships. In ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Library-Centric Software Design (LCSD'07), 2007.
26. D.J. Pearce and J. Noble. Relationship aspects. In 5th International Conference on Aspect-Oriented Software Development (AOSD '06), pages 75--86. ACM, 2006.
27. J. Rumbaugh. Relations as semantic constructs in an object-oriented language. In 2nd ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages and Applications (OOPSLA '87), pages 466--481. ACM, 1987.
28. A. Wren. Relationships for Object-oriented Programming Languages. PhD thesis, University of Cambridge, November 2007.

Index Terms

• Software and its engineering

  • Software notations and tools

    • General programming languages

      • Language features