Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An algebraic approach to the design of compilers for object-oriented languages

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Formal Aspects of Computing

Abstract

In this paper we describe an algebraic approach to construct provably correct compilers for object-oriented languages; this is illustrated for programs written in a language similar to a sequential subset of Java. It includes recursive classes, inheritance, dynamic binding, recursion, type casts and test, assignment, and class-based visibility, but a copy semantics. In our approach, we tackle the problem of compiler correctness by reducing the task of compilation to that of program refinement. Compilation is identified with the reduction of a source program to a normal form that models the execution of object code. The normal form is generated by a series of correctness-preserving transformations that are proved sound from the basic laws of the language; therefore it is correct by construction. The main advantages of our approach are the characterisation of compilation within a uniform framework, where comparisons and translations between semantics are avoided, and the modularity and extensibility of the resulting compiler.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aho AV, Sethi R, Ullman JD (1985) Compilers: principles, techniques, and tools. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  2. Back R (1980) Correct preserving program refinements: proof theory and application, volume 131 of Mathematical centre tracts. Mathematical Centre, Amsterdam

  3. Börger E, Batory DS (2008) Coupling design and verification in software product lines. In: FoIKS, pp 1–4

  4. Blech JO, Grégoire B (2008) Certifying code generation with Coq. In: Workshop Compiler Optimization meets Compiler Verification (COCV 2008), ENTCS. Elsevier

  5. Blech JO, Grégoire B (2008) Certifying code generation with Coq: A tool description. In: Workshop Compiler Optimization meets Compiler Verification (COCV 2008), ENTCS. Elsevier

  6. Bowen M (1998) Handel-C Language Reference Manual, 2.1. Embedded Solutions Limited

  7. Börger E, Schulte W (1998) Defining the java virtual machine as platform for provably correct java compilation. In: MFCS ’98: Proceedings of the 23rd international symposium on mathematical foundations of computer science. Springer, London, pp 17–35

  8. Borba P, Sampaio A, Cornélio M (2003) A refinement algebra for object-oriented programming. In: ECOOP 2003: European conference on object-oriented programming 2003, vol 2743. LNCS, Springer, pp 457–482

  9. Borba P, Sampaio A, Cavalcanti A, Cornélio M (2004) Algebraic reasoning for object-oriented programming. Sci Comput Program 52(1-3): 53–100

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Back R, von Wright J (1990) Refinement calculus, part I: sequential nondeterministic programs. In: REX workshop: Proceedings on stepwise refinement of distributed systems: models, formalisms, correctness, Springer, pp 42–66

  11. Back R, von Wright J (1990) Refinement calculus: a systematic introduction. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cornélio M, Cavalcanti A, Sampaio A (2002) Refactoring by Transformation. In: REFINE 2002 Workshop, Electronic notes in theoretical computer science, vol 70, Springer, pp 641–660

  13. Cavalcanti A, Naumann D (2000) A weakest precondition semantics for refinement of object-oriented programs. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 26(08): 713–728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cornélio M (2004) Applying object-oriented refactoring and patterns as formal refinements. PhD thesis, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco

  15. Duran A, Cavalcanti A, Sampaio A (2002) Refinement algebra for formal bytecode generation. In: ICFEM 2002-4th international conference on formal engineering methods (LNCS), vol 2495. Springer, Shanghai, pp 347–358

  16. Duran A, Cavalcanti A, Sampaio A (2003) A strategy for compiling classes, inheritance, and dynamic binding. In: FME 2003-International symposium of formal methods Europe, vol 2805, pp 301–320. Pisa, September 2003. LNCS, Springer

  17. Drossopoulou S, Damiani F, Dezani-Ciancaglini M, Giannini P (2002) More dynamic object reclassification: Fickle II. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst 24(2): 153–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dijkstra EW (1976) A discipline of programming. Prentice-Hall, Engewood Cliffs

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Duran A (2005) An algebraic approach to the design of compilers for object-oriented languages. PhD thesis, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco. Available at http://www.les.ufba.br/duranthesis/

  20. Fowler M (1999) Refactoring: improving the design of existing code. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Reading

    Google Scholar 

  21. Gosling J, Joy B, Steele G, Bracha G (2000) The Java Language Specification, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hayes IJ (1998) Separating timing and calculation in real-time refinement. In: Gundy J, Schwenke M, Vickers T (eds) Pacific’98: international refinement workshop and formal methods, Discrete mathematics and theoretical computer science, Springer, pp 1–16

  23. Harwood W, Cavalcanti ALC, Woodcock JCP (2008) A theory of pointers for the UTP. In: Fitzgerald JS, Haxthausen AE, Yenigun H (eds) Theoretical aspects of computing (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), vol 5160. Springer, Berlin, pp 141–155

  24. He J (1993) Hybrid parallel programming and implementation of synchronised communication. In: MFCS ’93: Proceedings of the 18th international symposium on mathematical foundations of computer science (LNCS), vol 711. Springer, London, pp 537–546

  25. Hoare CAR, He J, Sampaio A (1993) Normal form approach to compiler design. Acta Inform 30: 701–739

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Hoare CAR, Jifeng He (1998) Unifying theories of programming. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hayes IJ, Utting M (1998) Deadlines are termination. In: Gries D, de Roever W-P (eds) PROCOMET’98: IFIP—international conference on programming concepts and methods. Chapman and Hall, pp 186–204

  28. Klein G, Nipkow T (2006) A machine-checked model for a Java-like language, virtual machine and compiler. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst 28(4):619–695 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1146809.1146811

  29. Leroy X (2009) Formal verification of a realistic compiler. Commun ACM 52(7): 107–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Lermer K, Fidge C (2002) A formal model of real-time program compilation. Theor Comput Sci 282(1): 151–190

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. Lam H, Thai T (2001) NET framework essentials. O’Reilly & Associates, Inc. , Sebastopol

    Google Scholar 

  32. Lindholm T, Yellin F (1997) The Java virtual machine specification. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  33. Müller-Olm M (1997) Modular compiler verification: a refinement-algebraic approach advocating stepwise abstraction. Springer

  34. Morgan C (1994) Programming from specifications, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. McCarthy J, Painter J (1967) Correctness of a compiler for arithmetic expressions. In: Symposium on applied mathematics, vol 19. American Mathematical Society, pp 33–41

  36. Nipkow T, Oheimb D (1998) Java-light is type-safe—definitely. In: POPL ’98: Proceedings of the 25th ACM SIGPLAN- SIGACT symposium on principles of programming languages. ACM Press, New York, pp 161–170

  37. Opdyke W (1992) Refactoring object-oriented frameworks. PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

  38. Patterson DA, Hennessy JL (2005) Computer organization and design: The Hardware/software Interface. Morgan Kaufmann

  39. Platt DS (2001) Introducing Microsoft .NET. Microsoft Press

  40. Polak W (1981) Compiler specification and verification. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Perna JI, Woodcock J (2007) A denotational semantics for Handel-C hardware compilation. In: ICFEM, pp 266–285

  42. Perna JI, Woodcock J (2007) Proving wire-wise correctness for Handel-C compilation in HOL. Technical Report YCS-2008-429, Computer Science Department, The University of York, December

  43. Perna JI, Woodcock J (2008) Wire-wise correctness for handel-C synthesis in HOL. In: Pace GJ, Singh S (eds) Seventh International workshop on designing correct circuits (DCC), pp 86–100, March 2008

  44. Sampaio A (1997) An algebraic approach to compiler design, vol 4 of AMAST Series in Computing. World Scientific

  45. Santos TLVL, Cavalcanti ALC, Sampaio ACA (2006) Object Orientation in the UTP. In: Dunne S, Stoddart B (eds) Unifying theories of programming (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), vol 4010. Springer, pp 18–37

  46. Serrano M (1999) Wide classes. Lecture Notes in Computer Science

  47. Stärk R, Schmid J, Börger E (2001) Java and the Java Virtual Machine-Definition, Verification, Validation. Springer

  48. Silva L, Sampaio A, Liu Z (2008) Laws of object-orientation with reference semantics. Software engineering and formal methods. Int Confer 0: 217–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Tian YH (2006) Mechanically verifying correctness of CPS compilation. In: CATS ’06: Proceedings of the 12th computing: the Australasian theroy symposium, Darlinghurst, Australia, Australian Computer Society, Inc., pp 41–51

  50. Thatcher JW, Wagner EG, Wright JB (1981) More on advice on structuring compilers and proving them correct. Theor Comput Sci 15: 223–249

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. Watson G (2003) Compilation by refinement for a practical assembly language. In: Formal methods and software engineering. ICFEM 2003: 5th international conference on formal engineering methods (LNCS), vol 2885. Springer, Singapore, November 2003, pp 286–305

  52. Wildman L (2002) A formal basis for a program compilation proof tool. In: FME ’02: Proceedings of the international symposium of formal methods Europe on formal methods—getting IT right (LNCS), vol 2391. Springer, London, pp 491–510

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidade Federal da Bahia, Centro de Processamento de Dados MEFES Research Group, Salvador, BA, CEP 40170-110, Brazil

    Adolfo Duran

  2. Department of Computer Science, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK

    Ana Cavalcanti

  3. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Centro de Informática, Caixa Postal 7851, Recife, PE, CEP 50732-970, Brazil

    Augusto Sampaio

Authors
  1. Adolfo Duran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ana Cavalcanti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Augusto Sampaio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adolfo Duran.

Additional information

Michael Butler and Cliff Jones

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Duran, A., Cavalcanti, A. & Sampaio, A. An algebraic approach to the design of compilers for object-oriented languages. Form Asp Comp 22, 489–535 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-009-0124-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-009-0124-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation