Advertisement

Summary of: Dynamic Structural Operational Semantics

  • Christian JohansenEmail author
  • Olaf Owe
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11918)

Abstract

This short paper summarises the contributions published in the authors’ journal article [2].

The journal paper develops the theory of Dynamic Structural Operational Semantics (DSOS or Dynamic SOS) as a framework for describing semantics of programming languages that include dynamic software upgrades. DSOS is built on top of the Modular SOS since it allows a sharp separation of the program execution code from the additional structures needed at run-time. DSOS follows the same modularity and decoupling that MSOS advocates, partly motivated by the long term goal of having machine-checkable proofs for general results like type safety.

Dynamic SOS has been applied on two languages supporting dynamic software upgrades, namely the low-level Proteus, which supports updating of variables, functions, records, or types at specific program points, and Creol, which supports dynamic class upgrades in the setting of concurrent objects. Existing type analyses for software upgrades can be done on top of DSOS too, as we illustrate for Proteus.

References

  1. 1.
    Agha, G., Mason, I.A., Smith, S.F., Talcott, C.L.: A foundation for actor computation. J. Funct. Program. 7(1), 1–72 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Johansen, C., Owe, O.: Dynamic structural operational semantics. J. Log. Algebr. Methods Program. 107, 79–107 (2019)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Johnsen, E.B., Owe, O.: An asynchronous communication model for distributed concurrent objects. Softw. Syst. Model. 6(1), 39–58 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Johnsen, E.B., Owe, O., Simplot-Ryl, I.: A dynamic class construct for asynchronous concurrent objects. In: Steffen, M., Zavattaro, G. (eds.) FMOODS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3535, pp. 15–30. Springer, Heidelberg (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1007/11494881_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mosses, P.D.: Modular structural operational semantics. J. Log. Algebr. Program. 60–61, 195–228 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stoyle, G., Hicks, M.W., Bierman, G.M., Sewell, P., Neamtiu, I.: Mutatis mutandis: safe and predictable dynamic software updating. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 29(4), 183–194 (2007). Article No. 22 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yu, I.C., Johnsen, E.B., Owe, O.: Type-safe runtime class upgrades in creol. In: Gorrieri, R., Wehrheim, H. (eds.) FMOODS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4037, pp. 202–217. Springer, Heidelberg (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1007/11768869_16CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of InformaticsUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations