Software Composition: 12th International Conference, SC 2013, Budapest, Hungary, June 19, 2013. Proceedings

152 Pages·2013·2.628 MB·English

by  Seyed H. (Hossein) Haeri, Sibylle Schupp (auth.), Walter Binder, Eric Bodden, Welf Löwe (eds.)

Walter Binder
Eric Bodden
Welf Löwe (Eds.)
8 Software
8
0
8

S Composition
C
N
L
12th International Conference, SC 2013
Budapest, Hungary, June 2013
Proceedings
123
Lecture Notes in Computer Science 8088
CommencedPublicationin1973
FoundingandFormerSeriesEditors:
GerhardGoos,JurisHartmanis,andJanvanLeeuwen
EditorialBoard
DavidHutchison
LancasterUniversity,UK
TakeoKanade
CarnegieMellonUniversity,Pittsburgh,PA,USA
JosefKittler
UniversityofSurrey,Guildford,UK
JonM.Kleinberg
CornellUniversity,Ithaca,NY,USA
AlfredKobsa
UniversityofCalifornia,Irvine,CA,USA
FriedemannMattern
ETHZurich,Switzerland
JohnC.Mitchell
StanfordUniversity,CA,USA
MoniNaor
WeizmannInstituteofScience,Rehovot,Israel
OscarNierstrasz
UniversityofBern,Switzerland
C.PanduRangan
IndianInstituteofTechnology,Madras,India
BernhardSteffen
TUDortmundUniversity,Germany
MadhuSudan
MicrosoftResearch,Cambridge,MA,USA
DemetriTerzopoulos
UniversityofCalifornia,LosAngeles,CA,USA
DougTygar
UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley,CA,USA
GerhardWeikum
MaxPlanckInstituteforInformatics,Saarbruecken,Germany
Walter Binder Eric Bodden
Welf Löwe (Eds.)
Software
Composition
12th International Conference, SC 2013
Budapest, Hungary, June 19, 2013
Proceedings
1 3
VolumeEditors
WalterBinder
UniversityofLugano
FacultyofInformatics
6904Lugano,Switzerland
E-mail:[email protected]
EricBodden
TechnischeUniversitätDarmstadt
EuropeanCenterforSecurityandPrivacybyDesign(ECSPRIDE)
64293Darmstadt,Germany
E-mail:[email protected]
WelfLöwe
LinnaeusUniversity
DepartmentofComputerScience
35195Växjö,Sweden
E-mail:[email protected]
ISSN0302-9743 e-ISSN1611-3349
ISBN978-3-642-39613-7 e-ISBN978-3-642-39614-4
DOI10.1007/978-3-642-39614-4
SpringerHeidelbergDordrechtLondonNewYork
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2013942550
CRSubjectClassification(1998):D.2,F.3,D.3,D.1
LNCSSublibrary:SL2–ProgrammingandSoftwareEngineering
©IFIPInternationalFederationforInformationProcessing2013
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpartof
thematerialisconcerned,specificallytherightsoftranslation,reprinting,reuseofillustrations,recitation,
broadcasting,reproductiononmicrofilmsorinanyotherphysicalway,andtransmissionorinformation
storageandretrieval,electronicadaptation,computersoftware,orbysimilarordissimilarmethodology
nowknownorhereafterdeveloped.Exemptedfromthislegalreservationarebriefexcerptsinconnection
withreviewsorscholarlyanalysisormaterialsuppliedspecificallyforthepurposeofbeingenteredand
executedonacomputersystem,forexclusiveusebythepurchaserofthework.Duplicationofthispublication
orpartsthereofispermittedonlyundertheprovisionsoftheCopyrightLawofthePublisher’slocation,
initscurrentversion,andpermissionforusemustalwaysbeobtainedfromSpringer.Permissionsforuse
maybeobtainedthroughRightsLinkattheCopyrightClearanceCenter.Violationsareliabletoprosecution
undertherespectiveCopyrightLaw.
Theuseofgeneraldescriptivenames,registerednames,trademarks,servicemarks,etc.inthispublication
doesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfromtherelevant
protectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
Whiletheadviceandinformationinthisbookarebelievedtobetrueandaccurateatthedateofpublication,
neithertheauthorsnortheeditorsnorthepublishercanacceptanylegalresponsibilityforanyerrorsor
omissionsthatmaybemade.Thepublishermakesnowarranty,expressorimplied,withrespecttothe
materialcontainedherein.
Typesetting:Camera-readybyauthor,dataconversionbyScientificPublishingServices,Chennai,India
Printedonacid-freepaper
SpringerispartofSpringerScience+BusinessMedia(www.springer.com)
Preface
The12thInternationalConferenceonSoftwareComposition(SC2013)provided
researchersandpractitionerswithauniqueplatformtopresentanddiscusschal-
lenges of how composition of software parts may be used to build and maintain
large software systems. Co-located with the STAF 2013 Federated Conferences
in Budapest, SC 2013 built upon a history of a successful series of conferences
on software composition held since 2002 in cities across Europe.
Wereceived21fullsubmissionsco-authoredbyresearchers,practitioners,and
academics from 14 countries. One paper was desk rejected for obviously being
out of scope. All other papers were peer-reviewed by at least three reviewers,
and discussed by the Program Committee. Based on the recommendations and
discussions, we accepted 9 papers, leading to an acceptance rate of 43%.
Besides these technical papers, we are excited to have won Sven Apel as
keynotespeakerforSC2013,whosharedhisinsightsonmanagingandanalyzing
software product lines with the combined SC 2013 and STAF 2013 audience.
We aregratefulto the members ofthe ProgramCommittee andthe external
reviewers for helping us to seek submissions and provide valuable and timely
reviews. Their efforts enabled us to put together a high-quality technical pro-
gram for SC 2013. We are indebted to the local arrangements team of STAF
2013 for the successful organization of all conference and social events. The
SC 2013submission,review,andproceedingsprocesswasextensivelysupported
by the EasyChair Conference Management System. We also acknowledge the
prompt and professional support from Springer, who published these proceed-
ingsinprintedandelectronicvolumesaspartofthe LectureNotesinComputer
Science series.
Most importantly, we would like to thank all authors and participants of SC
2013 for their insightful works and discussions!
March 2013 Walter Binder
Eric Bodden
Welf Lo¨we
Program Committee
Danilo Ansaloni University of Lugano, Switzerland
Sven Apel University of Passau,Germany
Olivier Barais IRISA / INRIA / Univ. Rennes 1, France
Alexandre Bergel University of Chile, Chile
Domenico Bianculli University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg
Daniele Bonetta University of Lugano, Switzerland
Lubom´ır Bulej Charles University, Czech Republic
Shigeru Chiba The University of Tokyo, Japan
Ion Constantinescu Google Inc., USA
Schahram Dustdar Vienna University of Technology, Austria
Erik Ernst University of Aarhus, Denmark
Bernd Freisleben University of Marburg, Germany
Thomas Gschwind IBM Research, Switzerland
Michael Haupt Oracle Labs, Germany
Christian Ka¨stner Carnegie Mellon University, USA
Doug Lea SUNY Oswego, USA
Karl Lieberherr Northeastern University, USA
David Lorenz The Open University, Israel
Hidehiko Masuhara University of Tokyo, Japan
Oscar Nierstrasz University of Bern, Switzerland
Jacques Noy´e Ecole des Mines de Nantes, France
Ina Schaefer Technische Universita¨t Braunschweig,Germany
Andreas Sewe Technische Universita¨t Darmstadt, Germany
Mario Su¨dholt INRIA-Ecole des Mines de Nantes, France
Clemens Szyperski Microsoft Research, USA
Immanuel Trummer E´cole Polytechnique F´ed´eralede Lausanne,Switzerland
Alex Villazo´n Universidad Privada Boliviana, Bolivia
Eric Wohlstadter University of British Columbia, Canada
Thomas Wu¨rthinger Oracle Labs, Austria
Cheng Zhang Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China
VIII Organization
Additional Reviewers
Abdelmeged, Ahmed
Caracciolo,Andrea
Chis, Andrei
Ghica, Dan
Lessenich, Olaf
Schulze, Sandro
Siegmund, Janet
Zhang, Sai
Table of Contents
Reusable Components for Lightweight Mechanisation of Programming
Languages ....................................................... 1
Seyed H. Haeri and Sibylle Schupp
Neverlang 2 – Componentised Language Development for the JVM...... 17
Walter Cazzola and Edoardo Vacchi
Preserving Confidentiality in Component Compositions ................ 33
Andreas Fuchs and Sigrid Gu¨rgens
Method Shells: Avoiding Conflicts on Destructive Class Extensions by
Implicit Context Switches.......................................... 49
Wakana Takeshita and Shigeru Chiba
Separating Obligations of Subjects and Handlers for More Flexible
Event Type Verification............................................ 65
Jos´e S´anchez and Gary T. Leavens
Implementing Feature Interactions with Generic Feature Modules ....... 81
Fuminobu Takeyama and Shigeru Chiba
Compositional Development of BPMN............................... 97
Peter Y.H. Wong
Building a Customizable Business-Process-as-a-Service Application
with Current State-of-Practice...................................... 113
Fatih Gey, Stefan Walraven, Dimitri Van Landuyt, and
Wouter Joosen
Verifying Data Independent Programs Using Game Semantics .......... 128
Aleksandar S. Dimovski
Author Index................................................... 145
Reusable Components for Lightweight
Mechanisation of Programming Languages
Seyed H. Haeri (Hossein) and Sibylle Schupp
Institutefor Software Systems, HamburgUniversity of Technology, Germany
{hossein,schupp}@tu-harburg.de
Abstract. Implementing Programming Languages (PLs) has always
been a challenge for various reasons. One reason is the excess of rou-
tine tasks to be redone on every implementation cycle. This is despite
theremarkablefraction ofsyntaxandsemanticsusually shared between
successivecycles.Inthispaper,wepresentacomponent-basedapproach
to avoid reimplementation of shared PL fractions. We provide two sets
of reusable components; one for syntax implementation and another for
semantics. Oursyntaxandsemantics componentscorrespond tosyntac-
ticcategories andsemanticsrulesofaPLspecification, respectively.We
showhow,inadditiontotheirservicetoreusabilityinsyntaxandseman-
tics, ourcomponents can cater reusable implementation of PL analyses.
Our current level of experimentation suggests that this approach is ap-
plicable whereverthefollowing twofeaturesareavailable orcan besim-
ulated: Type Constraints and Multiple Inheritance. Implementing a PL
using our approach, however, requires some modest programming disci-
pline that we will explain throughout the text.
1 Introduction
Mechanisation of a PL is implementing it for the purpose of experimentally
studying its characteristics and conduct. One interacts with the mechanisation
to discover otherwise inapparent facts or flaws in action. PL mechanisation,
however,canbecomeveryinvolvedusingtraditionalformalproofsystems.Vari-
ous other frameworkshave,therefore,been crafted to help lightweightmechani-
sation. Different frameworks focus on facilitating different mechanisation tasks.
Mechanisation often enjoys cycles. Repeating implementation upon eachcy-
cle can form a considerable burden against mechanisation, especially because
consecutive cycles often share a sizeable fraction of their syntax, only differ in
few semantic rules, and, rarely add new analyses. Modularity becomes vital in
that, upon extension, existing modules ought to be readily reusable.
As such, component-based mechanisation can provide even more reusability
by facilitating implementation sharing for individual PL constructs. For exam-
ple, it is not uncommon for different PLs to be extended using similar con-
structs (in the syntax or semantics). Component-based mechanisation cancels
the need for reimplementing such constructs. In addition, our above interpreta-
tionofmodularitycomesasasideproductinthatPLmodulesalreadycomposed
of components need not to be touched upon the addition of new components.
W.Binder,E.Bodden,andW.L¨owe(Eds.):SC2013,LNCS8088,pp.1–16,2013.
(cid:2)c IFIPInternationalFederationforInformationProcessing2013
2 S.H. Haeri and S. Schupp
In this paper,we implement language-independentcomponents forsyntactic
categories to obtain syntax code reuse. We also offer a collection of semantics-
lenient derivation rules that are individually executable. These form our highly
flexiblecomponentsthatcatervarioussortsofsemanticscodereuseuponcompo-
sition.Aparticularlyinterestingconsequenceofthe flexibility inoursyntaxand
semanticscomponentsisanalysiscodereuse.Thesecomponentselevatethepro-
gramming level of mechanisation;they encourage coding in terms of themselves
(asopposedtoexacttype constructors),viz.,additionofnew type constructors
imposes no recompilation on existing code. (C.f. Expression Problem [29].)
Whilstouruseofmultipleinheritancecaterseasyextensionofmechanisation,
typeconstraintshelpthecompileroutlawreuseofmechanisationwhenconceptu-
ally inapplicable.Our approachis applicable independent ofthe formalismused
for specification. Yet, a modest programming discipline is required for enjoying
our reusability. Most of the burden is, however, on the Language Definitional
Framework(LDF). Our approachindeed minimises the PL implementer’s effort
when an extensive set of our components is available through the LDF.
We choose to embed our approach in Scala for its unique combination of
built-in features that suit mechanisation [23]. Both multiple inheritance and
type constraints have special flavours in Scala that are not shared universally
amongst languages. However, we do not make use of those specialities. Hence,
theapplicabilityofourapproachisdeemedtoonlybe subjecttotheavailability
of multiple inheritance and type constraints.
We start by reviewing the related literature in Section 2. In Section 3, we
provide a minimal explanation of the Scala features we use. We exemplify our
approach using five systems for lazy evaluation that we briefly present in Sec-
tion 4. Next, in Section 5, we demonstrate our components for both syntax and
semantics mechanisation. As an interesting extra consequence of our particu-
lar design of components, Section 6 shows how analysis mechanisation reuse is
gained. Concluding remarks and discussion on future work come in Section 7.1
2 Related Work
Funcons of PLanCompS [13] are composable components for PL mechanisation
each of which with a universally unique semantics. Funcons are similar to our
syntax components except that, due to our decoupling of syntax and semantics,
our components can have multiple pieces of semantics. On the other hand, a
funcon’s semantics is provided using Modular SOS [21] and Action Semantics
[20],whilstwedonotdemandanyparticularformalism.TheGLoominiparsers
enable scope-controlled extensions to its language by desugaring the extended
syntax into core GLoo [19]. SugarHaskell [9] provides similar facilities, but in
a layout-sensitive fashion and for Haskell. Polyglot [22] users can extend a PL
compiler (including that of Polyglotitself) by providing (one or more) compiler
passesthatrewritetheoriginalASTintoaJavaone.Thedifferencebetweenthe
1 onlinesourcecodeavailableathttp://www.sts.tuhh.de/~hossein/compatibility.