Producing abstract models for object-oriented languages

  • P. M. Yelland
Technical Contributions
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 489)


The central concern of this paper is the production of so-called abstract denotational models for object-oriented languages. These models ascribe equal representations to objects with the same observable behaviour. In order to characterize abstract models and observable behaviour precisely, a general framework is introduced for the study of object-oriented languages. This framework embodies in particular conceptions of programs and observations which are relevant to the production of abstract models. Using familiar concepts from universal algebra, we show how under certain circumstances, a correct abstract model of an object-oriented language may be derived automatically from a correct but non-abstract model. To conclude, we sketch the derivation of a correct abstract model for a simple object-oriented language.


Object-Oriented Programming Languages Denotational Semantics Abstract Models 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [BM84]
    R. J. R. Back and H. Mannila. A semantic approach to program modularity. Information and Control, 60:138–167, 1984.Google Scholar
  2. [BW82]
    M. Broy and M. Wirsing. Partial abstract types. Acta Informatica, 18(1), 1982.Google Scholar
  3. [Fis87]
    M. Fisher. Abstractness and compositionality. Technical report, Manchester University, 1987.Google Scholar
  4. [GM82]
    J. Goguen and J. Meseguer. Universal realization, persistent interconnection and implementation of abstract modules. In 9th Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (LNCS 140). Springer-Verlag, 1982.Google Scholar
  5. [Gra69]
    G. Graetzer. Universal Algebra. Van Nostrand, 1969.Google Scholar
  6. [Hen88]
    M. Hennessy. Algebraic Theory of Processes. MIT Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  7. [Mac72]
    S. MacLane. Categories for the Working Mathematician, Springer-Verlag, 1972.Google Scholar
  8. [Nip87]
    T. Nipkow. Behavioural Implementation Concepts for Nondeterministic Data-Types. PhD thesis, Dept. of Computer Science University of Manchester, 1987. Rep. UMCS-87-5-3.Google Scholar
  9. [ST87]
    D. Sanella and A. Tarlecki. On observational equivalence and algebraic specification. Journal of Computer and Systems Science, 43:150–178, 1987.Google Scholar
  10. [ST88]
    D. Sanella and A. Tarlecki. Toward formal development of programs from algebraic specifications: Implementations revisited. Acta Informatica, 25:233–281, 1988.Google Scholar
  11. [Wol88]
    M. Wolczko. Semantics of Object-Oriented Languages. PhD thesis, University of Manchester Department of Computer Science, 1988. Technical Report UMCS-88-6-1.Google Scholar
  12. [Yel89]
    P. M. Yelland. First steps towards fully abstract semantics for object-oriented languages. In European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Nottingham, 1989.Google Scholar
  13. [Yel90]
    P. M. Yelland. Modules and Modularity: A Study of Object-Oriented Programming. PhD thesis, University of Cambridge, 1990. (to appear).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. M. Yelland
    • 1
  1. 1.New Museums SiteCambridge University Computer LaboratoryCambridgeU.K.

Personalised recommendations