Advertisement

An Introduction to Task Oriented Programming

  • Peter Achten
  • Pieter Koopman
  • Rinus Plasmeijer
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8606)

Abstract

Task Oriented Programming (or shortly TOP) is a new programming paradigm. It is used for developing applications where human beings closely collaborate on the internet to accomplish a common goal. The tasks that need to be done to achieve this goal are described on a very high level of abstraction. This means that one does need to worry about the technical realization to make the collaboration possible. The technical realization is generated fully automatically from the abstract description. TOP can therefore be seen as a model driven approach. The tasks described form a model from which the technical realization is generated.

This paper describes the iTask system which supports TOP as an Embedded Domain Specific Language (EDSL). The host language is the pure and lazy functional language Clean.

Based on the high level description of the tasks to do, the iTask system generates a web-service. This web-service offers a web interface to the end-users for doing their work, it coordinates the tasks being described, and it provides the end-users with up-to-date information about the status of the tasks being performed by others.

Tasks are typed, every task processes a value of a particular type. Tasks can be calculated dynamically. Tasks can be higher order: the result of a task may be a newly generated task which can be passed around and be assigned to some other worker later on. Tasks can be anything. Also the management of tasks can be expressed as a task. For example, commonly there will be many tasks assigned to someone. A task, predefined in the library for convenience, offers the tasks to do to the end-user much like an email application offers an interface to handle emails. This enables the end-user to freely choose which tasks to work on. However, one can define other ways for managing tasks.

A new aspect of the system is that tasks have become reactive: a task does not deliver one value when the task is done, but, while the work takes place, it constantly produces updated versions of the task value reflecting the progress of the work taken place. This current task value can be observed by others and may influence the things others can see or do.

Keywords

Task Function Interactive Task Exception Handler Boxed Task Host Language 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the reviewers for their constructive feedback.

Supplementary material

References

  1. 1.
    Kernighan, B., Ritchie, D.: The C Programming Language, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1988)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Plasmeijer, R., Achten, P., Koopman, P.: iTasks: executable specifications of interactive work flow systems for the web. In: Hinze, R., Ramsey, N. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Conference on Functional Programming, ICFP 2007, Freiburg, Germany, pp. 141–152. ACM Press (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lijnse, B., Plasmeijer, R.: iTasks 2: iTasks for end-users. In: Morazán, M.T., Scholz, S.-B. (eds.) IFL 2009. LNCS, vol. 6041, pp. 36–54. Springer, Heidelberg (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    van der Heijden, M., Lijnse, B., Lucas, P.J.F., Heijdra, Y.F., Schermer, T.R.J.: Managing COPD exacerbations with telemedicine. In: Peleg, M., Lavrač, N., Combi, C. (eds.) AIME 2011. LNCS, vol. 6747, pp. 169–178. Springer, Heidelberg (2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jansen, J., Lijnse, B., Plasmeijer, R.: Towards dynamic workflows for crisis management. In: French, S., Tomaszewski, B., Zobel, C. (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM 2010, Seattle, WA, USA, May 2010Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lijnse, B., Jansen, J., Nanne, R., Plasmeijer, R.: Capturing the Netherlands coast guard’s SAR workflow with iTasks. In: Mendonca, D., Dugdale, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM 2011, Lisbon, Portugal. ISCRAM Association, May 2011Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Meijer, E.: Server side web scripting in Haskell. J. Funct. Program 10(1), 1–18 (2000)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hanus, M.: High-level server side web scripting in Curry. In: Ramakrishnan, I.V. (ed.) PADL 2001. LNCS, vol. 1990, pp. 76–92. Springer, Heidelberg (2001) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elsman, M., Larsen, K.F.: Typing XHTML web applications in ML. In: Jayaraman, B. (ed.) PADL 2004. LNCS, vol. 3057, pp. 224–238. Springer, Heidelberg (2004) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elsman, M., Hallenberg, N.: Web programming with SMLserver. In: Dahl, V. (ed.) PADL 2003. LNCS, vol. 2562, pp. 74–91. Springer, Heidelberg (2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thiemann, P.: WASH/CGI: server-side web scripting with sessions and typed, compositional forms. In: Adsul, B., Ramakrishnan, C.R. (eds.) PADL 2002. LNCS, vol. 2257, p. 192. Springer, Heidelberg (2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Serrano, M., Gallesio, E., Loitsch, F.: Hop, a language for programming the web 2.0. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, OOPSLA 2006, Portland, Oregon, USA, 22–26 October 2006, pp. 975–985 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Loitsch, F., Serrano, M.: Hop client-side compilation. In: Proceedings of the 7th Symposium on Trends in Functional Programming, TFP 2007, New York, NY, USA, Interact, 2–4 April 2007, pp. 141–158 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cooper, E., Lindley, S., Yallop, J.: Links: web programming without tiers. In: de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M., Graf, S., de Roever, W.-P. (eds.) FMCO 2006. LNCS, vol. 4709, pp. 266–296. Springer, Heidelberg (2007) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cooper, E., Lindley, S., Wadler, P., Yallop, J.: An idiom’s guide to formlets. Technical report, The University of Edinburgh, UK (2007). http://groups.inf.ed.ac.uk/links/papers/formlets-draft2007.pdf
  16. 16.
    van der Aalst, W., ter Hofstede, A., Kiepuszewski, B., Barros, A.: Workflow patterns. Technical Report FIT-TR-2002-02, Queensland University of Technology (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hemel, Z., Verhaaf, R., Visser, E.: WebWorkFlow: an object-oriented workflow modeling language for web applications. In: Czarnecki, K., Ober, I., Bruel, J.-M., Uhl, A., Völter, M. (eds.) MODELS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5301, pp. 113–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Crandall, B., Klein, G., Hoffman, R.R.: Working Minds: A Practitioner’s Guide to Cognitive Task Analysis. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Plasmeijer, R., van Eekelen, M.: Clean language report (version 2.1) (2002). http://clean.cs.ru.nl

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Achten
    • 1
  • Pieter Koopman
    • 1
  • Rinus Plasmeijer
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Computing and Information Sciences (iCIS)Radboud University NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations