Advertisement

Summary of: An Evaluation of Interaction Paradigms for Active Objects

  • Farzane KaramiEmail author
  • Olaf Owe
  • Toktam Ramezanifarkhani
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11918)

Abstract

This short paper summarises the contributions published in [1]. The purpose of this paper is to compare communication paradigms of active object languages considering expressiveness, efficiency, syntactic and semantic complexity including ease of reasoning.

Keywords

Active objects Asynchronous methods Distributed Systems Futures 

References

  1. 1.
    Karami, F., Owe, O., Ramezanifarkhani, T.: An evaluation of interaction paradigms for active objects. J. Log. Algebr. Methods Program. 103, 154–183 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlamp.2018.11.008. ISSN 2352-2216MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hewitt, C., Bishop, P., Steiger, R.: A universal modular actor formalism for artificial intelligence. In: IJCAI (1973)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baker, H., Hewitt, C.: The incremental garbage collection of processes. In: Proceedings of Symposium on Artificial Intelligence Programming Languages, ACM Sigplan Notices, vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 55–59 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yonezawa, A. (ed.): ABCL: An Object-Oriented Concurrent System. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Halstead, R.H.: MultiLisp: a language for concurrent symbolic computation. TOPLAS 7, 501–538 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Johnsen, E.B., Owe, O.: An asynchronous communication model for distributed concurrent objects. J. Softw. Syst. Model. 6(1), 39–58 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Johnsen, E.B., Hähnle, R., Schäfer, J., Schlatte, R., Steffen, M.: ABS: a core language for abstract behavioral specification. In: Aichernig, B.K., de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M. (eds.) FMCO 2010. LNCS, vol. 6957, pp. 142–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25271-6_8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Boer, F., et al.: A survey of active object languages. ACM Comput. Surv. 50(5), 1–39 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Din, C.C., Owe, O.: Compositional reasoning about active objects with shared futures. Formal Aspects Comput. 27(3), 551–572 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Farzane Karami
    • 1
    Email author
  • Olaf Owe
    • 1
  • Toktam Ramezanifarkhani
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of InformaticsUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations