Using real time constraints for modularisation

  • Brian Kirk
  • Libero Nigro
  • Francesco Pupo
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1204)


This paper advocates an object-oriented approach to the development of distributed real-time systems which clearly separates timing from functional concerns. It also describes a philosophy for modularising, and then designing systems, based on the localisation of timing constraints as one of prime criteria for partitioning. Active objects (i.e., actors) are adopted as the basic building blocks in-the-small. They are not aware of timing constraints nor of scheduling structures. Active objects are in charge of processing messages as they arrive. Message buffering and delivery is the responsibility of a control machine which hosts a reflective scheduler object. Timing constraints express, in general, patterns of multi-object, time-driven co-ordination and synchronisation. The resultant approach improves modularity and object reusability. The paper illustrates the application of the proposed concepts through real world examples.

Key words

distributed real time systems object orientation timing constraints in-the-large modularisation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    G Agha: Actors: A model for concurrent computation in distributed systems, MIT Press, 1986.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    C Alexander: Notes on the synthesis of form, Harward University Press, 1964.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R Beraldi, L Nigro: Distributed simulation of large PCS networks using a Time Warp mechanism, Proc. of Eurosim 96 HPCN Conf., Delft, The Netherlands (to appear).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    L Bergmans, M Aksit: Composing synchronisation and real-time constraints, J. of Parallel and Distributed Computing, September issue, 1996.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    CAN, A serial bus — not just for vehicles, CIA, CAN in Automation, Am Weichselgarten 26, D-91058, Erlangen, Germany.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P Daponte, D Grimaldi, L Nigro, F Pupo: Distributed measurement systems: an object oriented architecture and a case study, to appear on Computer Standards and Interfaces.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    F De Paoli, F Tisato: Architectural abstractions and time modeling in HyperReal, Proc. of EUROMICRO Workshop on Real Time Systems, pp. 222–226, Odense (Denmark), June 1995.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    C Ghezzi, D Mandrioli, S Morasca, M Pezzè: A unified high-level Petri net formalism for time-critical systems, IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 17(2), pp. 160:172 February 1991.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D Grimaldi, L Nigro, F Pupo: Development issues of distributed measurement systems, Proc. of Imeko Measurement Conf., Budapest, 12–14 September, 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    B Kirk: Real time protocol design for control area networks, Proc. of Real-Time 95 Conf., Ostrava (Cz Rep.), 5–7 Sept., pp. 251–268, 1995.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    B Kirk, L Nigro: Distributed architecture for real time, in Oberon-2, in Advances in Modular Languages, P. Shulthess (ed.), Universitatsverlag Ulm GmbH, Proc. of Joint Modular Languages Conference 1994, pp. 325–366.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Java Remote Method Invocation and Object Serialization, http://chatsubo.javasoft.comGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    C D Locke: Software architecture for hard real-time applications: cyclic executives versus fixed priority executives, The Journal of Real-Time Systems, 4(1):37–53, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    P Maes: Concepts and experiments in computational reflection, Proc. of OOPSLA 87, pp. 147–155, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 22(12).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    L Nigro: A real time architecture based on Shlaer Mellor object lifecycles, J. of Object Oriented Programming, 8(1):20–31, 1995.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    L Nigro, F Pupo: Modeling and analysing DART systems through high-level Petri nets, Springer-Verlag, LNCS 1091, pp. 420–439, 1996.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    L Nigro, F Tisato: Timing as a programming-in-the-large issue, Microsystems and Microprocessors J., 20(4): 211–223, June 1996.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    D L Parnas: On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules, Comm. ACM, December, 1972.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    M Reiser, N Wirth: Programming in Oberon, Addison Wesley, 1992.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    S Ren, G Agha: RTsynchronizer: language support for real-time specifications in distributed systems, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 30(11), 1995.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    S Ren, G Agha, M Saito: A modular approach for programming distributed real-time systems, J. of Parallel and Distributed Computing, Special issue on Object-Oriented Real Time Systems, 1996 (to appear).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    M Saito, G Agha: A modular approach to real-time synchronization, in Object-Oriented Real-Time Systems Workshop, pp. 13–22, San Antonio, Texas, October 1995, OOPS Messenger, ACM SIGPLAN.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    S Shlaer, S J Mellor: Object lifecycles — Modelling the world in states, Yourdon Press 1992.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    N Suri et al.: Synchronization issues in real-time systems, Proc. of IEEE, 82(1), pp. 41–54. 1994.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    K Turski: A Global time system for CAN networks, Proc. of ICC94, Int. CAN Conference, Am Weichselgarten 26, D-91058, Erlangen, Germany.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    N Wirth: Toward a discipline of real-time programming, Comm. ACM, 20(8), 1977.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian Kirk
    • 1
  • Libero Nigro
    • 2
  • Francesco Pupo
    • 2
  1. 1.Robinson AssociatesPainswickUK
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informatica e SistemisticaUniversità della CalabriaRendeItaly

Personalised recommendations