2,378 research outputs found

    A Note on the Expressiveness of BIP

    Get PDF
    We extend our previous algebraic formalisation of the notion of component-based framework in order to formally define two forms, strong and weak, of the notion of full expressiveness. Our earlier result shows that the BIP (Behaviour-Interaction-Priority) framework does not possess the strong full expressiveness. In this paper, we show that BIP has the weak form of this notion and provide results detailing weak and strong full expressiveness for classical BIP and several modifications, obtained by relaxing the constraints imposed on priority models.Comment: In Proceedings EXPRESS/SOS 2016, arXiv:1608.0269

    Symbolic Implementation of Connectors in BIP

    Full text link
    BIP is a component framework for constructing systems by superposing three layers of modeling: Behavior, Interaction, and Priority. Behavior is represented by labeled transition systems communicating through ports. Interactions are sets of ports. A synchronization between components is possible through the interactions specified by a set of connectors. When several interactions are possible, priorities allow to restrict the non-determinism by choosing an interaction, which is maximal according to some given strict partial order. The BIP component framework has been implemented in a language and a tool-set. The execution of a BIP program is driven by a dedicated engine, which has access to the set of connectors and priority model of the program. A key performance issue is the computation of the set of possible interactions of the BIP program from a given state. Currently, the choice of the interaction to be executed involves a costly exploration of enumerative representations for connectors. This leads to a considerable overhead in execution times. In this paper, we propose a symbolic implementation of the execution model of BIP, which drastically reduces this overhead. The symbolic implementation is based on computing boolean representation for components, connectors, and priorities with an existing BDD package

    Relating BIP and Reo

    Get PDF
    Coordination languages simplify design and development of concurrent systems. Particularly, exogenous coordination languages, like BIP and Reo, enable system designers to express the interactions among components in a system explicitly. In this paper we establish a formal relation between BI(P) (i.e., BIP without the priority layer) and Reo, by defining transformations between their semantic models. We show that these transformations preserve all properties expressible in a common semantics. This formal relation comprises the basis for a solid comparison and consolidation of the fundamental coordination concepts behind these two languages. Moreover, this basis offers translations that enable users of either language to benefit from the toolchains of the other.Comment: In Proceedings ICE 2015, arXiv:1508.0459

    Contract Aware Components, 10 years after

    Get PDF
    The notion of contract aware components has been published roughly ten years ago and is now becoming mainstream in several fields where the usage of software components is seen as critical. The goal of this paper is to survey domains such as Embedded Systems or Service Oriented Architecture where the notion of contract aware components has been influential. For each of these domains we briefly describe what has been done with this idea and we discuss the remaining challenges.Comment: In Proceedings WCSI 2010, arXiv:1010.233

    Component Assemblies in the Context of Manycore

    No full text
    International audienceWe present a component-based software design flow for building parallel applications running on top of manycore platforms. The flow is based on the BIP - Behaviour, Interaction, Priority - component frameworkand its associated toolbox. It provides full support for modeling of application software, validation of its functional correctness, modeling and performance analysis on system-level models, code generation and deployment on target manycore platforms. The paper details some of the steps of the design flow. The design flow is illustrated through the modeling and deployment of two applications, the Cholesky factorization and the MJPEG decoding on MPARM, an ARM-based manycore platform. We emphasize the merits of the design flow, notably fast performance analysis as well as code generation and effi cient deployment on manycore platforms
    • …
    corecore