research-article

Product lines of theorems

Authors:

Benjamin Delaware,

Don BatoryAuthors Info & Claims

OOPSLA '11: Proceedings of the 2011 ACM international conference on Object oriented programming systems languages and applications

Pages 595 - 608

https://doi.org/10.1145/2048066.2048113

Published: 22 October 2011 Publication History

Abstract

Mechanized proof assistants are powerful verification tools, but proof development can be difficult and time-consuming. When verifying a family of related programs, the effort can be reduced by proof reuse. In this paper, we show how to engineer product lines with theorems and proofs built from feature modules. Each module contains proof fragments which are composed together to build a complete proof of correctness for each product. We consider a product line of programming languages, where each variant includes metatheory proofs verifying the correctness of its semantic definitions. This approach has been realized in the Coq proof assistant, with the proofs of each feature independently certifiable by Coq. These proofs are composed for each language variant, with Coq mechanically verifying that the composite proofs are correct. As validation, we formalize a core calculus for Java in Coq which can be extended with any combination of casts, interfaces, or generics.

References

[1]

Paul Bassett. Frame-based software engineering. IEEE Software, 4(4), 1987.

Digital Library

[2]

D. Batory and E. Borger. Modularizing theorems for software product lines: The jbook case study. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 14(12):2059--2082, 2008.

[3]

D. Batory, Rich Cardone, and Y. Smaragdakis. Object-oriented frameworks and product-lines. In SPLC, 2000.

Digital Library

[4]

D. Batory, J. Kim, and P. Hofner. Feature interactions, products, and composition. In GPCE, 2011.

Digital Library

[5]

D. Batory, J.N. Sarvela, and A. Rauschmayer. Scaling Step-Wise Refinement. IEEE TSE, 30, June 2004.

Digital Library

[6]

Don Batory. Feature models, grammars, and propositional formulas. Software Product Lines, pages 7--20, 2005.

Digital Library

[7]

Don Batory, Rich Cardone, and Yannis Smaragdakis. Object-oriented framework and product lines. In SPLC, pages 227--247, 2000.

Digital Library

[8]

Yves Bertot and Pierre Casteran. Interactive Theorem Proving and Program Development. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004.

Digital Library

[9]

Olivier Boite. Proof reuse with extended inductive types. In Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics, pages 50--65, 2004.

[10]

Adam Chlipala. A verified compiler for an impure functional language. In POPL 2010, January 2010.

Digital Library

[11]

David Delahaye. A tactic language for the system coq. In Proceedings of Logic for Programming and Automated Reasoning (LPAR), Reunion Island, volume 1955 of LNCS}, pages 85--95. Springer, 2000.

Digital Library

[12]

Feature oriented programming. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature_Oriented_Programming, 2008.

[13]

Georges Gonthier. In Deepak Kapur, editor, Computer Mathematics, chapter The Four Colour Theorem: Engineering of a Formal Proof, pages 333--333. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008.

Digital Library

[14]

Atsushi Igarashi, Benjamin C. Pierce, and Philip Wadler. Featherweight java: a minimal core calculus for java and gj. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst., 23(3):396--450, 2001.

Digital Library

[15]

K.C. Kang. Private Correspondence, 2005.

[16]

Xavier Leroy. Formal verification of a realistic compiler. Commun. ACM, 52:107--115, July 2009.

Digital Library

[17]

Michael Y. Levin and Benjamin C. Pierce. Tinkertype: A language for playing with formal systems. Journal of Functional Programming, 13(2), March 2003. A preliminary version appeared as an invited paper at the Logical Frameworks and Metalanguages Workshop (LFM), June 2000.

Digital Library

[18]

M. D. McIlroy. Mass-produced software components. Proc. NATO Conf. on Software Engineering, Garmisch, Germany. 1968.

[19]

R. Monson-Haefel. Enterprise Java Beans. O'Reilly, 3rd edition, 2001.

Digital Library

[20]

Peter D. Mosses. Modular structural operational semantics. J. Log. Algebr. Program.}, 60--61:195--228, 2004.

[21]

Anne Mulhern. Proof weaving. In Proceedings of the First Informal ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Mechanizing Metatheory, September 2006.

[22]

J. Neighbors. The draco approach to constructing software from reusable components. IEEE TSE, September 1984.

Digital Library

[23]

D.L. Parnas. On the design and development of program families. IEEE TSE, SE-2(1):1 -- 9, March 1976.

Digital Library

[24]

Benjamin C. Pierce. Types and Programming Languages. MIT Press, 2002.

Digital Library

[25]

Y. Smaragdakis and D. Batory. Mixin Layers: An Object-Oriented Implementation Technique for Refinements and Collaboration-Based Designs. ACM TOSEM, December 2001.

Digital Library

[26]

Yannis Smaragdakis and Don Batory. Implementing reusable object-oriented components. In the 5th Int. Conf. on Software Reuse (ICSR 98), pages 36--45. Society Press, 1998.

Digital Library

[27]

Robert Stark, Joachim Schmid, and Egon Borger. Java and the java virtual machine - definition, verification, validation, 2001.

Digital Library

[28]

Rok Strnisa, Peter Sewell, and Matthew J. Parkinson. The {Java} module system: core design and semantic definition. In OOPSLA, pages 499--514, 2007.

Digital Library

[29]

T. Thum, I. Schaefer, M. Kuhlemann, and S. Apel. Proof composition for deductive verification of software product lines. In Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshop. (ICSTW) 2011}, pages 270--277, March 2011.

Digital Library

[30]

Michael VanHilst and David Notkin. Decoupling change from design. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes}, 21:58--69, October 1996.

Digital Library

Cited By

Blaudeau CLiu F(2022)A conceptual framework for safe object initialization: a principled and mechanized soundness proof of the Celsius modelProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/35633146:OOPSLA2(729-757)Online publication date: 31-Oct-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3563314
Scaletta MHähnle RSteinhöfel DBubel RTilevich EDe Roover C(2021)Delta-based verification of software product familiesProceedings of the 20th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Generative Programming: Concepts and Experiences10.1145/3486609.3487200(69-82)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3486609.3487200
Gurov DHähnle RKamburjan E(2020)Who Carries the Burden of Modularity?Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation: Verification Principles10.1007/978-3-030-61362-4_1(3-21)Online publication date: 29-Oct-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61362-4_1
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Product lines of theorems
1. Software and its engineering
  1. Software notations and tools
    1. Formal language definitions
2. Theory of computation
  1. Formal languages and automata theory

Recommendations

Product lines of theorems
OOPSLA '11

Mechanized proof assistants are powerful verification tools, but proof development can be difficult and time-consuming. When verifying a family of related programs, the effort can be reduced by proof reuse. In this paper, we show how to engineer product ...
Higher-order representation of substructural logics
ICFP '10

We present a technique for higher-order representation of substructural logics such as linear or modal logic. We show that such logics can be encoded in the (ordinary) Logical Framework, without any linear or modal extensions. Using this encoding, ...
Higher-order representation of substructural logics
ICFP '10: Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGPLAN international conference on Functional programming

We present a technique for higher-order representation of substructural logics such as linear or modal logic. We show that such logics can be encoded in the (ordinary) Logical Framework, without any linear or modal extensions. Using this encoding, ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

OOPSLA '11: Proceedings of the 2011 ACM international conference on Object oriented programming systems languages and applications

October 2011

1104 pages

ISBN:9781450309400

DOI:10.1145/2048066

General Chair:
Cristina Videira Lopes
University of California, Irvine, USA
,
Program Chair:
Kathleen Fisher
Tufts University, USA

ACM SIGPLAN Notices Volume 46, Issue 10
OOPSLA '11
October 2011
1063 pages
ISSN:0362-1340
EISSN:1558-1160
DOI:10.1145/2076021
Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2011 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGPLAN: ACM Special Interest Group on Programming Languages

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 22 October 2011

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

SPLASH '11

Sponsor:

SIGPLAN

SPLASH '11: Conference on Systems, Programming, and Applications: Software for Humanity

October 22 - 27, 2011

Oregon, Portland, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 268 of 1,244 submissions, 22%

Upcoming Conference

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

40
Total Citations
View Citations
287
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)7
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3

Reflects downloads up to 18 Aug 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Blaudeau CLiu F(2022)A conceptual framework for safe object initialization: a principled and mechanized soundness proof of the Celsius modelProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/35633146:OOPSLA2(729-757)Online publication date: 31-Oct-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3563314
Scaletta MHähnle RSteinhöfel DBubel RTilevich EDe Roover C(2021)Delta-based verification of software product familiesProceedings of the 20th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Generative Programming: Concepts and Experiences10.1145/3486609.3487200(69-82)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3486609.3487200
Gurov DHähnle RKamburjan E(2020)Who Carries the Burden of Modularity?Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation: Verification Principles10.1007/978-3-030-61362-4_1(3-21)Online publication date: 29-Oct-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61362-4_1
Tikhonova U(2019)Reusable specification templates for defining dynamic semantics of DSLsSoftware and Systems Modeling (SoSyM)10.1007/s10270-017-0590-018:1(691-720)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10270-017-0590-0
Bach Poulsen CRouvoet ATolmach AKrebbers RVisser E(2017)Intrinsically-typed definitional interpreters for imperative languagesProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/31581042:POPL(1-34)Online publication date: 27-Dec-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3158104
Omar CAldrich J(2016)Programmable semantic fragments: the design and implementation of typyACM SIGPLAN Notices10.1145/3093335.299324552:3(81-92)Online publication date: 20-Oct-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3093335.2993245
Omar CAldrich JFischer BSchaefer I(2016)Programmable semantic fragments: the design and implementation of typyProceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Generative Programming: Concepts and Experiences10.1145/2993236.2993245(81-92)Online publication date: 20-Oct-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2993236.2993245
Gal BBromberg YRéveillère LSolanki J(2016)A Flexible SoC and Its Methodology for Parser-Based ApplicationsACM Transactions on Reconfigurable Technology and Systems10.1145/293937910:1(1-23)Online publication date: 24-Sep-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2939379
ter Beek MReniers Mde Vink E(2016)Supervisory Controller Synthesis for Product Lines Using CIF 3Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation: Foundational Techniques10.1007/978-3-319-47166-2_59(856-873)Online publication date: 5-Oct-2016
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47166-2_59
Pham TDubois CLevy N(2015)Towards correct-by-construction product variants of a software product line: GFML, a formal language for feature modulesElectronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science10.4204/EPTCS.182.4182(44-55)Online publication date: 12-Apr-2015
https://doi.org/10.4204/EPTCS.182.4
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents