Connecting effects and uniqueness with adoption

Boyland, John; Retert, William

doi:10.1145/1047659.1040329

Cited by 25 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Others have modeled dependent objects with linear implications [12,25,21] but it is unclear how well those approaches can be automated. Our solution is to use a live variable analysis to detect dead objects, i.e., dead references to objects with unique permissions, and implicitly release any captured permissions from these dead objects.…”

Section: Plural: Access Permissions For Javamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Practical API Protocol Checking with Access Permissions

Bierhoff

Beckman

Aldrich

2009

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Reusable APIs often de ne usage protocols. We previously developed a sound modular type system that checks compliance with typestate-based protocols while a ording a great deal of aliasing exibility. We also developed Plural, a prototype tool that embodies our approach as an automated static analysis and includes several extensions we found useful in practice. This paper evaluates our approach along the following dimensions: (1) We report on experience in specifying relevant usage rules for a large Java standard API with our approach. We also specify several other Java APIs and identify recurring patterns. (2) We summarize two case studies in verifying third-party open-source code bases with few false positives using our tool. We discuss how tool shortcomings can be addressed either with code refactorings or extensions to the tool itself. These results indicate that our approach can be used to specify and enforce real API protocols in practice.

show abstract

Section: Plural: Access Permissions For Javamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Existing work on permissions recognized these challenges [11,12] but only supports unique and immutable permissions directly and does not track behavioral properties (such as typestates) with permissions.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Practical API Protocol Checking with Access Permissions

Bierhoff

Beckman

Aldrich

2009

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Following Boyland and Retert (2005), it would be possible to allow carving multiple objects out of a group region, provided one statically proves or dynamically checks that these objects are distinct. The degenerate case where only one object can be carved out represents a sweet spot, in the sense that no side condition is needed.…”

Section: Concrete Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Syntactic soundness proof of a type-and-capability system with hidden state

Pottier¹

2012

J. Funct. Prog.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a formal definition and machine-checked soundness proof for a very expressive type-and-capability system, that is, a low-level type system that keeps precise track of ownership and side effects.The programming language has first-class functions and references. The type system's features include: universal, existential, and recursive types; subtyping; a distinction between affine and unrestricted data; support for strong updates; support for naming values and heap fragments, via singleton and group regions; a distinction between ordinary values (which exist at runtime) and capabilities (which don't); support for dynamic re-organizations of the ownership hierarchy, by dis-assembling and re-assembling capabilities; support for temporarily or permanently hiding a capability, via frame and anti-frame rules.One contribution of the paper is the definition of the type-and-capability system itself. We present the system as modularly as possible. In particular, at the core of the system, the treatment of affinity, in the style of dual intuitionistic linear logic, is formulated in terms of an arbitrary monotonic separation algebra, a novel axiomatization of resources, ownership, and the manner in which they evolve with time. Only the peripheral layers of the system are aware that we are dealing with a specific monotonic separation algebra, whose resources are references and regions. This semiabstract organization should facilitate further extensions of the system with new forms of resources.The other main contribution is a machine-checked proof of type soundness. The proof is carried out in Wright and Felleisen's syntactic style. This offers evidence that this relatively simple-minded proof technique can scale up to systems of this complexity, and constitutes a viable alternative to more sophisticated semantic proof techniques. We do not claim that the syntactic technique is superior: we simply illustrate how it is used and highlight its strengths and shortcomings.

show abstract

“…We have designed a type system [?] based on fractional permissions [5,6] that we believe will achieve this goal, but space precludes including it here.…”

Section: Semanticsmentioning

confidence: 99%