Confined Roles and Decapsulation in Object Teams — Contradiction or Synergy?

  • Stephan Herrmann
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7850)

Many Faces of Modularity

The Object Teams programming model [1] has been developed to advance our capability to write modular programs. A central concept in this programming model is the notion of teams - instantiable classes - that serve as a container for nested classes. This nesting is stronger than it is in languages like Java, because the type system applies the concept of family polymorphism [2], so all nested classes are actually dependent classes: classes that depend on the enclosing instance. As nested classes can again be teams there are no limits to nesting.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Herrmann, S.: Object Teams: Improving Modularity for Crosscutting Collaborations. In: Akşit, M., Mezini, M., Unland, R. (eds.) NODe 2002. LNCS, vol. 2591, pp. 248–264. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ernst, E.: Family Polymorphism. In: Lindskov Knudsen, J. (ed.) ECOOP 2001. LNCS, vol. 2072, pp. 303–326. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Parnas, D.L.: On a ‘buzzword’: Hierarchical structure. In: IFIP Congress 74, pp. 336–339. North Holland Publishing Company (1974)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tarr, P., Ossher, H., Harrison, W., Stan, S.J.: N degrees of separation: Multi-dimensional separation of concerns. In: Proc. of the 21st ICSE (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kiczales, G., Lamping, J., Mendhekar, A., Maeda, C., Lopes, C., Loingtier, J.M., Irwin, J.: Aspect-oriented programming. Technical Report SPL97-008 P9710042, Xerox PARC (February 1997)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ossher, H., Tarr, P.: Multi-Dimensional Separation of Concerns and The Hyperspace Approach. In: Software Architecture and Component Technology: State of the Art in Research and Practice. Kluwer Academic Publishers (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ungar, D., Smith, R.B.: Self: The power of simplicity. In: Proc. of OOPSLA 1987 (1987)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Herrmann, S., Hundt, C., Mosconi, M.: ObjectTeams/Java Language Definition version 1.0 (OTJLD). Technical Report 2007/03, Technische Universität Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Herrmann, S., Hundt, C., Mosconi, M.: ObjectTeams/Java Language Definition current version (OTJLD) (2002–2011), http://www.ObjectTeams.org/def/
  10. 10.
    Object Teams Development Tooling (OTDT) web site, http://www.eclipse.org/objectteams/download.php
  11. 11.
    Vitek, J., Bokowski, B.: Confined types in Java. Software: Practice and Experience 31(6), 507–532 (2001)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Herrmann, S.: Confinement and representation encapsulation in Object Teams. Technical Report 2004/06, Technical University Berlin (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Müller, P., Rudich, A.: Ownership transfer in universe types. SIGPLAN Not. 42(10), 461–478 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Müller, P., Poetzsch-Heffter, A.: Universes: A type system for alias and dependency control. Technical Report 279, Fernuniversität Hagen (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dietl, W., Müller, P.: Object Ownership in Program Verification. In: Clarke, D., Noble, J., Wrigstad, T. (eds.) Aliasing in Object-Oriented Programming. LNCS, vol. 7850, pp. 289–318. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Herrmann, S.: Gradual encapsulation. Journal of Object Technology 7(9), 47–68 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    OSGi: OSGi service platform, r4 core v4.3 specification. Technical report, The OSGi Alliance (April 2011), http://www.osgi.org/osgi_technology/download_specs.asp
  18. 18.
    Herrmann, S., Mosconi, M.: Integrating Object Teams and OSGi: Joint efforts for superior modularity. In: Proc. of TOOLS Europe (2007); also in: Journal of Object Technology 6(9) (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Herrmann, S., Hundt, C., Mehner, K., Wloka, J.: Using guard predicates for generalized control of aspect instantiation and activation. In: Dynamic Aspects Workshop (DAW 2005), at AOSD 2005, Chicago (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    TOPPrax project home page (2003-2006), http://www.topprax.de
  21. 21.
    Ernst, E.: gbeta – a Language with Virtual Attributes, Block Structure, and Propagating, Dynamic Inheritance. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Aarhus, Århus, Denmark (1999)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ernst, E., Ostermann, K., Cook, W.R.: A virtual class calculus. In: Proc. of POPL 2006, pp. 270–282. ACM, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Odersky, M., et al.: An overview of the scala programming language. Technical Report IC/2004/64, EPFL Lausanne, Switzerland (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mezini, M., Ostermann, K.: Conquering aspects with caesar. In: Proc. AOSD 2003. ACM Press, Boston (2003)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gasiunas, V., Mezini, M., Ostermann, K.: Dependent classes. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages and Applications (OOPSLA). ACM Press (2007)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Clarke, D., Drossopoulou, S., Noble, J., Wrigstad, T.: Tribe: a simple virtual class calculus. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Aspect-Oriented Software Development, AOSD 2007, pp. 121–134. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bracha, G., von der Ahé, P., Bykov, V., Kashai, Y., Maddox, W., Miranda, E.: Modules as Objects in Newspeak. In: D’Hondt, T. (ed.) ECOOP 2010. LNCS, vol. 6183, pp. 405–428. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kiczales, G., Hilsdale, E., Hugunin, J., Kersten, M., Palm, J., Griswold, W.G.: An Overview of AspectJ. In: Lindskov Knudsen, J. (ed.) ECOOP 2001. LNCS, vol. 2072, pp. 327–353. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lieberherr, K., Lorenz, D., Mezini, M.: Programming with Aspectual Components. In: Technical Report, Northeastern University (April 1999)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Herrmann, S.: Translation polymorphism in Object Teams. Technical Report 2004/05, Technical University Berlin (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Cameron, N., Noble, J., Wrigstad, T.: Tribal ownership. In: Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Object Oriented Programming Systems Languages and Applications, OOPSLA 2010, pp. 618–633. ACM, New York (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephan Herrmann
    • 1
  1. 1.GK Software AGSchöneckGermany

Personalised recommendations