research-article

Type-based parametric analysis of program families

Authors:

Martin ErwigAuthors Info & Claims

ACM SIGPLAN Notices, Volume 49, Issue 9

Pages 39 - 51

https://doi.org/10.1145/2692915.2628155

Published: 19 August 2014 Publication History

Abstract

Previous research on static analysis for program families has focused on lifting analyses for single, plain programs to program families by employing idiosyncratic representations. The lifting effort typically involves a significant amount of work for proving the correctness of the lifted algorithm and demonstrating its scalability. In this paper, we propose a parameterized static analysis framework for program families that can automatically lift a class of type-based static analyses for plain programs to program families. The framework consists of a parametric logical specification and a parametric variational constraint solver. We prove that a lifted algorithm is correct provided that the underlying analysis algorithm is correct. An evaluation of our framework has revealed an error in a previous manually lifted analysis. Moreover, performance tests indicate that the overhead incurred by the general framework is bounded by a factor of 2.

References

[1]

S. Apel, C. Kästner, A. Größlinger, and C. Lengauer. Type Safety for Feature-Oriented Product Lines. Automated Software Engineering, 17(3):251--300, 2010.

Digital Library

[2]

S. Apel, A. von Rhein, P. Wendler, A. Größlinger, and D. Beyer. Strategies for Product-Line Verification: Case Studies and Experiments. In IEEE Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, pages 482--491, 2013.

Digital Library

[3]

E. Bodden, T. Tolêdo, M. Ribeiro, C. Brabrand, P. Borba, and M. Mezini. SPLLIFT: Statically Analyzing Software Product Lines in Minutes Instead of Years. In ACM SIGPLAN Conf. on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 355--364, 2013.

Digital Library

[4]

C. Brabrand, M. Ribeiro, T. Tolêdo, J. Winther, and P. Borba. Intraprocedural dataflow analysis for software product lines. In Transactions on Aspect-Oriented Software Development X, pages 73--108. 2013.

Digital Library

[5]

C. Brabrand, M. Ribeiro, T. Tolêdo, and P. Borba. Intraprocedural Dataflow Analysis for Software Product Lines. In Int. Conf. on Aspect-Oriented Software Development, pages 13--24, 2012.

Digital Library

[6]

L. Cardelli. Program fragments, linking, and modularization. In ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 266--277, 1997.

Digital Library

[7]

S. Chen and M. Erwig. Counter-Factual Typing for Debugging Type Errors. In ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 583--594, 2014.

Digital Library

[8]

S. Chen and M. Erwig. Guided Type Debugging. In Int. Symp. on Functional and Logic Programming, LNCS 8475, pages 35--51, 2014.

[9]

S. Chen, M. Erwig, and E. Walkingshaw. An Error-Tolerant Type System for Variational Lambda Calculus. In ACM Int. Conf. on Functional Programming, pages 29--40, 2012.

Digital Library

[10]

S. Chen, M. Erwig, and E. Walkingshaw. Extending Type Inference to Variational Programs. ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, 36(1):1:1--1:54, 2014.

Digital Library

[11]

A. Classen, P. Heymans, P.-Y. Schobbens, and A. Legay. Symbolic Model Checking of Software Product Lines. In IEEE Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, pages 321--330, 2011.

Digital Library

[12]

A. Classen, P. Heymans, P.-Y. Schobbens, A. Legay, and J.-F. Raskin. Model Checking Lots of Systems: Efficient Verification of Temporal Properties in Software Product Lines. In IEEE Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, pages 335--344, 2010.

Digital Library

[13]

P. C. Clements and L. M. Northrop. Software Product Lines: Practices and Patterns. Addison-Wesley, Boston, 2001.

Digital Library

[14]

M. Cordy, A. Classen, G. Perrouin, P.-Y. Schobbens, P. Heymans, and A. Legay. Simulation-based Abstractions for Software Product-Line Model Checking. In IEEE Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, pages 672--682, 2012.

Digital Library

[15]

L. Damas and R. Milner. Principal Type Schemes for Functional Programming Languages. In ACM Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 207--208, 1982.

Digital Library

[16]

B. Delaware, W. Cook, and D. Batory. Product lines of theorems. In ACM SIGPLAN Int. Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, pages 595--608, 2011.

Digital Library

[17]

B. Delaware, W. R. Cook, and D. Batory. Fitting the Pieces Together: A Machine-Checked Model of Safe Composition. In ACM SIGSOFT Int. Symp. on the Foundations of Software Engineering, pages 243--252, 2009.

Digital Library

[18]

M. Erwig and E. Walkingshaw. The Choice Calculus: A Representation for Software Variation. ACM Trans. on Software Engineering and Methodology, 21(1):6:1--6:27, 2011.

Digital Library

[19]

P. Gazzillo and R. Grimm. SuperC: Parsing all of C by Taming the Preprocessor. In ACM SIGPLAN Conf. on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 323--334, 2012.

Digital Library

[20]

C. Hankin and D. Métayer. A type-based framework for program analysis. In Static Analysis Symposium, LNCS 864, pages 380--394. 1994.

[21]

N. Heintze. Control-flow analysis and type systems. In Static Analysis Symposium, LNCS 983, pages 189--206. 1995.

Digital Library

[22]

C. Kästner, S. Apel, T. Thüm, and G. Saake. Type Checking Annotation-Based Product Lines. ACM Trans. on Software Engineering and Methodology, 21(3):14:1--14:39, 2012.

Digital Library

[23]

C. Kästner, P. G. Giarrusso, T. Rendel, S. Erdweg, K. Ostermann, and T. Berger. Variability-aware parsing in the presence of lexical macros and conditional compilation. In ACM SIGPLAN Int. Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, pages 805--824, 10 2011.

Digital Library

[24]

C. Kästner, K. Ostermann, and S. Erdweg. A Variability-Aware Module System. In ACM SIGPLAN Int. Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, pages 773--792, 2012.

Digital Library

[25]

J. Liebig, A. von Rhein, C. Kästner, S. Apel, J. Dörre, and C. Lengauer. Large-Scale Variability-Aware Type Checking and Dataflow Analysis. Technical Report MIP-1212, Fakultät für Informatik und Mathematik, Universität Passau, 2012.

[26]

J. Liebig, A. von Rhein, C. Kästner, S. Apel, J. Dörre, and C. Lengauer. Scalable analysis of variable software. In Foundations of Software Engineering, pages 81--91, 2013.

Digital Library

[27]

M. Naik and J. Palsberg. A type system equivalent to a model checker. ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, 30(5):29:1--29:24, 2008.

Digital Library

[28]

F. Nielson, H. R. Nielson, and C. Hankin. Principles of program analysis. Springer, 1999.

Digital Library

[29]

M. Odersky, M. Sulzmann, and M. Wehr. Type Inference with Constrained Types. Theory and Practice of Object Systems, 5(1):35--55, 1999.

Digital Library

[30]

J. Palsberg. Type-based analysis and applications. In ACM SIGPLAN-SIGSOFT Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering, pages 20--27, 2001.

Digital Library

[31]

D. L. Parnas. On the design and development of program families. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 2(1):1--9, 1976.

Digital Library

[32]

F. Pottier. A versatile constraint-based type inference system. Nordic J. of Computing, 7(4):312--347, Dec. 2000.

Digital Library

[33]

F. Pottier and V. Simonet. Information flow inference for ML. ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, 25(1):117--158, 2003.

Digital Library

[34]

F. Prost. A Formalization of Static Analyses in System F. In Automated Deduction CADE-16, pages 252--266. 1999.

Digital Library

[35]

T. Reps, S. Horwitz, and M. Sagiv. Precise interprocedural dataflow analysis via graph reachability. In ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 49--61, 1995.

Digital Library

[36]

J. A. Robinson. A machine-oriented logic based on the resolution principle. Journal of the ACM, 12(1):23--41, Jan. 1965.

Digital Library

[37]

V. Simonet. An extension of HM(X) with bounded existential and universal data-types. In ACM SIGPLAN Int. Conf. on Functional Programming, pages 39--50, 2003.

Digital Library

[38]

V. Simonet and F. Pottier. A constraint-based approach to guarded algebraic data types. ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, 29(1):1--38, 2007.

Digital Library

[39]

P. J. Stuckey and M. Sulzmann. A theory of overloading. In ACM SIGPLAN Int. Conf. on Functional Programming, pages 167--178, 2002.

Digital Library

[40]

M. Sulzmann, M. Müller, and C. Zenger. Hindley/Milner style type systems in constraint form. Research Report ACRC-99-009, University of South Australia, School of Computer and Information Science, 1999.

[41]

T. Thüm, I. Schaefer, S. Apel, and M. Hentschel. Family-based deductive verification of software product lines. In International Conference on Generative Programming and Component Engineering, pages 11--20, 2012.

Digital Library

[42]

J. B. Wells. Typability and Type Checking in System F Are Equivalent and Undecidable. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 98:111--156, 1998.

Cited By

Castro TTeixeira LAlves VApel SCordy MGheyi R(2021)A Formal Framework of Software Product Line AnalysesACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology10.1145/344238930:3(1-37)Online publication date: 23-Apr-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3442389
Chen SWu B(2020)Efficient Counter-factual Type Error DebuggingScience of Computer Programming10.1016/j.scico.2020.102544(102544)Online publication date: Sep-2020
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scico.2020.102544
Castro TLanna AAlves VTeixeira LApel SSchobbens P(2018)All roads lead to RomeScience of Computer Programming10.1016/j.scico.2017.10.013152:C(116-160)Online publication date: 15-Jan-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.scico.2017.10.013
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Type-based parametric analysis of program families
1. Software and its engineering
  1. Software notations and tools
    1. General programming languages
      1. Language types
        Functional languages
2. Theory of computation
  1. Semantics and reasoning
    1. Program constructs
      1. Functional constructs
      2. Type structures

Recommendations

Type-based parametric analysis of program families
ICFP '14: Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGPLAN international conference on Functional programming

Previous research on static analysis for program families has focused on lifting analyses for single, plain programs to program families by employing idiosyncratic representations. The lifting effort typically involves a significant amount of work for ...
Finding suitable variability abstractions for lifted analysis
Special Issue on Extended Versions of Papers Presented at FM 2016
Abstract
Many software systems are today variational: they are built as program families or Software Product Lines. They can produce a potentially huge number of related programs, known as products or variants, by selecting suitable configuration options (...
Taming type annotations in gradual typing

Gradual typing provides a methodology to integrate static and dynamic typing, harmonizing their often conflicting advantages in a single language. When a user wants to enjoy the advantages of static typing, most gradual languages require that they add ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM SIGPLAN Notices

ACM SIGPLAN Notices Volume 49, Issue 9

ICFP '14

September 2014

361 pages

ISSN:0362-1340

EISSN:1558-1160

DOI:10.1145/2692915

Editors:
Mark W. Bailey
Hamilton College, Clinton, NY
,
Rajeev Balasubramonian
University of Utah
,
Al Davis
University of Utah
,
Sarita Adve
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champ

Issue’s Table of Contents

ICFP '14: Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGPLAN international conference on Functional programming
August 2014
390 pages
ISBN:9781450328739
DOI:10.1145/2628136
General Chair:
Johan Jeuring
Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
,
Program Chair:
Manuel M.T. Chakravarty
University of New South Wales, Australia

Copyright © 2014 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 19 August 2014

Published in SIGPLAN Volume 49, Issue 9

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

7
Total Citations
View Citations
362
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)8
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 13 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Castro TTeixeira LAlves VApel SCordy MGheyi R(2021)A Formal Framework of Software Product Line AnalysesACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology10.1145/344238930:3(1-37)Online publication date: 23-Apr-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3442389
Chen SWu B(2020)Efficient Counter-factual Type Error DebuggingScience of Computer Programming10.1016/j.scico.2020.102544(102544)Online publication date: Sep-2020
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scico.2020.102544
Castro TLanna AAlves VTeixeira LApel SSchobbens P(2018)All roads lead to RomeScience of Computer Programming10.1016/j.scico.2017.10.013152:C(116-160)Online publication date: 15-Jan-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.scico.2017.10.013
Dimovski ATilevich EDe Roover C(2021)Lifted termination analysis by abstract interpretation and its applicationsProceedings of the 20th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Generative Programming: Concepts and Experiences10.1145/3486609.3487202(96-109)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3486609.3487202
Shahin RChechik M(2020)Automatic and efficient variability-aware lifting of functional programsProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/34282254:OOPSLA(1-27)Online publication date: 13-Nov-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3428225
Adelsberger SIgried BMoser MSavenkov VSetzer A(2018)Formal Verification for Feature-Based Composition of Workflows2018 14th European Dependable Computing Conference (EDCC)10.1109/EDCC.2018.00039(173-181)Online publication date: Sep-2018
https://doi.org/10.1109/EDCC.2018.00039
Midtgaard JDimovski ABrabrand CWąsowski A(2015)Systematic derivation of correct variability-aware program analysesScience of Computer Programming10.1016/j.scico.2015.04.005105:C(145-170)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.scico.2015.04.005

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents