Challenges and Directions in Formalizing the Semantics of Modeling Languages

Developing software from models is a growing practice and there exist many model-based tools (e.g., editors, interpreters, debuggers, and simulators) for supporting model-driven engineering. Even though these tools facilitate the automation of software engineering tasks and activities, such tools are typically engineered manually. However, many of these tools have a common semantic foundation centered around an underlying modeling language, which would make it possible to automate their development if the modeling language specification were formalized. Even though there has been much work in formalizing programming languages, with many successful tools constructed using such formalisms, there has been little work in formalizing modeling languages for the purpose of automation. This paper discusses possible semantics-based approaches for the formalization of modeling languages and describes how this formalism may be used to automate the construction of modeling tools

Using formal methods to develop WS-BPEL applications

In recent years, WS-BPEL has become a de facto standard language for orchestration of Web Services. However, there are still some well-known difficulties that make programming in WS-BPEL a tricky task. In this paper, we firstly point out major loose points of the WS-BPEL specification by means of many examples, some of which are also exploited to test and compare the behaviour of three of the most known freely available WS-BPEL engines. We show that, as a matter of fact, these engines implement different semantics, which undermines portability of WS-BPEL programs over different platforms. Then we introduce Blite, a prototypical orchestration language equipped with a formal operational semantics, which is closely inspired by, but simpler than, WS-BPEL. Indeed, Blite is designed around some of WS-BPEL distinctive features like partner links, process termination, message correlation, long-running business transactions and compensation handlers. Finally, we present BliteC, a software tool supporting a rapid and easy development of WS-BPEL applications via translation of service orchestrations written in Blite into executable WS-BPEL programs. We illustrate our approach by means of a running example borrowed from the official specification of WS-BPEL

Executable component-based semantics

The potential benefits of formal semantics are well known. However, a substantial amount of work is required to produce a complete and accurate formal semantics for a major language; and when the language evolves, large-scale revision of the semantics may be needed to reflect the changes. The investment of effort needed to produce an initial definition, and subsequently to revise it, has discouraged language developers from using formal semantics. Consequently, many major programming languages (and most domain-specific languages) do not yet have formal semantic definitions.To improve the practicality of formal semantic definitions, the PLanCompS project has developed a component-based approach. In this approach, the semantics of a language is defined by translating its constructs (compositionally) to combinations of so-called fundamental constructs, or ‘funcons’. Each funcon is defined using a modular variant of Structural Operational Semantics, and forms a language-independent component that can be reused in definitions of different languages. A substantial library of funcons has been developed and tested in several case studies. Crucially, the definition of each funcon is fixed, and does not need changing when new funcons are added to the library.For specifying component-based semantics, we have designed and implemented a meta-language called CBS. It includes specification of abstract syntax, of its translation to funcons, and of the funcons themselves. Development of CBS specifications is supported by an integrated development environment. The accuracy of a language definition can be tested by executing the specified translation on programs written in the defined language, and then executing the resulting funcon terms using an interpreter generated from the CBS definitions of the funcons. This paper gives an introduction to CBS, illustrates its use, and presents the various tools involved in our implementation of CBS

Lightweight and static verification of UML executable models

Executable models play a key role in many development methods (such as MDD and MDA) by facilitating the immediate simulation/implementation of the software system under development. This is possible because executable models include a fine-grained specification of the system behaviour using an action language. Executable models are not a new concept but are now experiencing a comeback. As a relevant example, the OMG has recently published the first version of the “Foundational Subset for Executable UML Models” (fUML) standard, an executable subset of the UML that can be used to define, in an operational style, the structural and behavioural semantics of systems. The OMG has also published a beta version of the “Action Language for fUML” (Alf) standard, a concrete syntax conforming to the fUML abstract syntax, that provides the constructs and textual notation to specify the fine-grained behaviour of systems. The OMG support to executable models is substantially raising the interest of software companies for this topic. Given the increasing importance of executable models and the impact of their correctness on the final quality of software systems derived from them, the existence of methods to verify the correctness of executable models is becoming crucial. Otherwise, the quality of the executable models (and in turn the quality of the final system generated from them) will be compromised. Despite the number of research works targetting the verification of software models, their computational cost and poor feedback makes them difficult to integrate in current software development processes. Therefore, there is the need for efficient and useful methods to check the correctness of executable models and tools integrated to the modelling tools used by designers. In this thesis we propose a verification framework to help the designers to improve the quality of their executable models. Our framework is composed of a set of lightweight static methods, i.e. methods that do not require to execute the model in order to check the desired property. These methods are able to check several properties over the behavioural part of an executable model (for instance, over the set of operations that compose a behavioural executable model) such as syntactic correctness (i.e. all the operations in the behavioural model conform to the syntax of the language in which it is described), non-redundancy (i.e. there is no another operation with exactly the same behaviour), executability (i.e. after the execution of an operation, the reached system state is -in case of strong executability- or may be -in case of weak executability- consistent with the structural model and its integrity constraints) and completeness (i.e. all possible changes on the system state can be performed through the execution of the operations defined in the executable model). For incorrect models, the methods that compose our verification framework return a meaningful feedback that helps repairing the detected inconsistencies