2011
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-21464-6_9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fair Subtyping for Multi-party Session Types

Abstract: The subtyping relation defined for dyadic session type theories may compromise the liveness of multi-party sessions. In this paper we define a fair subtyping relation for multi-party session types that preserves liveness, we relate it with the subtyping relation for dyadic session types, and we provide coinductive, axiomatic, and algorithmic characterizations for it.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
28
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our future work includes the applications to higher-order processes [29,31,30], polymorphic types [19,7,18], fair subtypings [33,34] and contract subtyping [3]. We plan to use the characteristic processes in typecheckers for session types.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our future work includes the applications to higher-order processes [29,31,30], polymorphic types [19,7,18], fair subtypings [33,34] and contract subtyping [3]. We plan to use the characteristic processes in typecheckers for session types.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Advanced subtyping of local types with respect to liveness is studied theoretically in [37]. Our present work is based on a coarser-grained treatment of fairness in the global model, to cater for applications to existing (mainstream) languages where it may be difficult to precisely enforce a particular subtyping for sessions via the native type system.…”
Section: Related Work and Concluding Remarksmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The key to this approach is that the characteristics of syntactic MPST can be leveraged to serve the soundness of the bounded validation; as opposed to solely relying on syntactic restrictions for outright safety. We treat output choice fairness by a structural transformation in the model construction, that reflects the underlying issue of session subtyping [37]; e.g., our validation accepts P1 (above) only if fairness is assumed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There session types are higher-order and recursive, their operational semantics is defined by parametrising the interactions of session types on pre-subtyping relations, and the fair subtyping is defined as a greatest fixed point (Definition 2.4). In our development we adopted the same technique as [20]. However, our aim was to model the standard subtyping of [13], while Padovani focuses on the properties of his new fair subtyping.…”
Section: Proposition 2 [ Unfolding and Complement Commute ]mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An alternative "fair" subtyping has been proposed recently in [20]. There session types are higher-order and recursive, their operational semantics is defined by parametrising the interactions of session types on pre-subtyping relations, and the fair subtyping is defined as a greatest fixed point (Definition 2.4).…”
Section: Proposition 2 [ Unfolding and Complement Commute ]mentioning
confidence: 99%