JR: flexible distributed programming in an extended Java

Keen, Aaron W.; Ge, Tingjian; Maris, Justin T.; Olsson, Ronald A.

doi:10.1109/icdsc.2001.918988

Cited by 23 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One problem with mChaRM is that it cannot provide static type checks on the communication semantics, due to its reliance on reflection (OO3). JR [9] is another Java extension for distributed programming, but it relies on hardwired references to physical service locations, thus limiting flexibility and reuse (OO2).…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A type system extension for middleware interactions

Labey

Steegmans

2007

Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Middleware-Application Interaction in Conjunction With Euro-Sys 2007 - MAI '07

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Object-oriented programming languages such as Java provides inadequate support for advanced method invocation strategies in distributed applications. Invocation semantics such as reliable unicast and multicast must be implemented based on primitive, unreliable unicast mechanisms such as Java RMI and Socket communication. This forces developers to devise ad hoc communication strategies, which is a repetitive and error-prone process. Moreover, these communication strategies are entangled with the business logic of the application, making the code hard to read and maintain.In this paper, we propose an extension of the Java type system based on communication qualifiers. These qualifiers decorate variables with information about the invocation semantics that must be used when methods are invoked on that variable. We show how communication qualifiers are used to support transparent multicast and reliable unicast invocation semantics in Java. Moreover, we introduce declarative operations to enable developers to fine-tune these communication strategies.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A type system extension for middleware interactions

Labey

Steegmans

2007

Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Middleware-Application Interaction in Conjunction With Euro-Sys 2007 - MAI '07

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…transferring money from a bank to another by means of a point of sales terminal (three processes) [12], paying taxes on-line (three processes in Spain: a taxpayer, the Exchequer, and Spain's Certification Authority), filtering in e-commerce [13] (a customer, a filter system, and several service providers), or reaching a virtual agreement in an auction sale (multiple processes). Reference [10] provides a complete taxonomy of languages that support this interaction model, and recent contributions presented in [12,14,15] have extended Java to support multiparty interactions to some extent. In [8], the model was further researched and combined with aspect orientation.…”

Section: Multiparty Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fairness in systems based on multiparty interactions

Ruiz¹,

Corchuelo²,

Toro³

2003

Concurrency and Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYIn the context of the Multiparty Interaction Model, fairness is used to insure that an interaction that is enabled sufficiently often in a concurrent program will eventually be selected for execution. Unfortunately, this notion does not take conspiracies into account, i.e. situations in which an interaction never becomes enabled because of an unfortunate interleaving of independent actions; furthermore, eventual execution is usually too weak for practical purposes since this concept can only be used in the context of infinite executions. In this article, we present a new fairness notion, k-conspiracy-free fairness, that improves on others because it takes finite executions into account, alleviates conspiracies that are not inherent to a program, and k may be set a priori to control its goodness to address the above-mentioned problems.

show abstract

“…The JR programming language (Keen et al, 2004) takes a different approach: it extends JAVA providing a rich concurrency model with a variety of mechanisms. None of this mechanisms directly models the notion of object state.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

On State Classes and Their Dynamic Semantics

2006

Proceedings of the First International Conference on Software and Data Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:We introduce state classes, a construct to program objects that can be safely concurrently accessed. State classes model the notion of object's state (intended as some abstraction over the value of fields) that plays a key role in concurrent object-oriented programming (as the state of an object changes, so does its coordination behavior). We show how state classes can be added to Java-like languages by presenting STATEJ, an extension of JAVA with state classes. The operational semantics of the state class construct is illustrated both at an abstract level, by means of a core calculus for STATEJ, and at a concrete level, by defining a translation from STATEJ into JAVA.

show abstract

JR: flexible distributed programming in an extended Java

Cited by 23 publications

References 45 publications

A type system extension for middleware interactions

A type system extension for middleware interactions

Fairness in systems based on multiparty interactions

On State Classes and Their Dynamic Semantics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About