Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

A mechanically verified code generator

  • Published:
Journal of Automated Reasoning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We describe the specification, implementation and proof of correctness of a code generator for a subset of Gypsy 2.05. The code generator is specified in the Boyer-Moore logic; its proof is fully machine-checked using the Kaufmann-enhanced Boyer-Moore theorem prover. Our code generator sits atop a ‘stack’ of verified system components providing a prototype development environment for constructing highly reliable application Programs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Aubin, R., ‘Mechanizing structural induction’, PhD Thesis, Univ. of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, 1976.

  2. Bevier, W. R., ‘Kit: A study in operating system verification’, Tech. Rept CLI-28, Computational Logic, Inc., August, 1988.

  3. Bevier, W. R., Hunt, W. A., Moore, J S., and Young, W. D., ‘An approach to system verification’ (in this issue of The Journal of Automated Reasoning).

  4. Boyer, R. S. and Moore, J S., A Computational Logic, Academic Press, New York, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Boyer, R. S. and Moore, J S., A Computational Logic Handbook, Academic Press, New York, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Burstall, R. M., ‘Proving properties of programs by structural induction’, Computer J. 12, 1 (February, 1969), 41–48.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cartwright, R., ‘A practical formal semantic definition and verification system for typed LISP’, PhD Thesis, Stanford Univ., 1976.

  8. Chirica, L. M. and Martin, D. F., ‘An approach to compiler correctness’, Proceedings of the International Conference on Reliable Software, April, 1975, pp. 96–103.

  9. Cohn, A., ‘Machine assisted proofs of recursion implementation’, PhD Thesis, Univ. of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, 1979.

  10. Good, D. I., Akers, R. L. and Smith, L. M., ‘Report on Gypsy 2.05’, Tech. Rept CLI-1, Computational Logic, Inc., October, 1986.

  11. Good, D. I., Divito, B. L. and Smith, M. K., ‘Using the Gypsy methodology’, Tech. Rept Draft CLI-2, Computational Logic, Inc., January, 1988.

  12. Henhapl, W. and Jones, C. B., ‘The block structure concept and some possible implementations’, Tech. Rept 25.104, IBM Laboratories, Vienna, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hunt, W. A., ‘The mechanical verification of a microprocessor design’, Tech. Rept CLI-6, Computational Logic, Inc., September, 1986.

  14. Kaufmann, Matt, ‘A user's manual for an interactive enhancement to the Boyer-Moore theorem prover’, Tech. Rept CLI-19, Computational Logic, Inc., May, 1988.

  15. Lucas, P., ‘Two constructive realizations of the block concept and their realization’, Tech. Rept 25.082, IBM Laboratories, Vienna, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lynn, D. S., ‘Interactive compiler proving using Hoare proof rules’, Tech. Rept ISI/RR-78-70, Information Sciences Institute, January, 1978.

  17. McCarthy, John, ‘Towards a mathematical science of computation’, Proceedings of the IFIP Congress, Amsterdam, 1962.

  18. McCarthy, John and Painter, J., ‘Correctness of a compiler for arithmetic expressions’, Proceeding of Symposium on Applied Mathematics, American Mathematical Society, 1967.

  19. Milner, R. and Weyhrauch, R., ‘Proving compiler correctness in a mechanized logic’, in Machine Intelligence 7, Edinburgh Univ. Press, Edinburgh, Scotland, 1972, pp. 51–70.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Milne, R. and Strachey, C., A Theory of Programming Language Semantics, Chapman and Hall, London, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Moore, J S., ‘A mechanically verified language implementation’, Tech. Rept CLI-30, Computational Logic, Inc., September, 1988.

  22. Moore, J S., ‘PITON: A verified assembly level language’, Tech. Rept CLI-22, Computational Logic, Inc., June, 1988.

  23. Polak, W., Compiler Specification and Verification, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ragland, L. C., ‘A verified program verifier’, PhD Thesis, Univ. of Texas at Austin, 1973.

  25. Young, W. D., ‘A verified optimizer for Pico-Piton’, Internal Note 107, December, 1988, Computational Logic, Inc., Austin, Texas.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Young, W. D., ‘A verified code generator for a subset of Gypsy’, PhD Thesis, Univ. of Texas at Austin, December, 1988.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computational Logic, Inc., 1717 West Sixth Street, Suite 290, 78703, Austin, TX, U.S.A.

    William D. Young

Authors
  1. William D. Young
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Young, W.D. A mechanically verified code generator. J Autom Reasoning 5, 493–518 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00243134

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00243134

Key words

Search

Navigation