Extending Attribute Grammars to Support Programming-in-the-Large

Attribute grammars add specification of static semantic properties to context-free grammars, which in turn describe the syntactic structure of program units. However, context-free grammars cannot express programming-in-the-large features common in modern programming languages, including unordered collections of units, included units and sharing of included units. We present extensions to context-free grammars, and corresponding extensions to attribute grammars, suitable for defining such features. We explain how batch and incremental attribute evaluation algorithms can be adapted to support these extensions, resulting in a uniform approach to intra-unit and inter-unit static semantic analysis and translation of multi-unit programs

Interpretable Categorization of Heterogeneous Time Series Data

Understanding heterogeneous multivariate time series data is important in many applications ranging from smart homes to aviation. Learning models of heterogeneous multivariate time series that are also human-interpretable is challenging and not adequately addressed by the existing literature. We propose grammar-based decision trees (GBDTs) and an algorithm for learning them. GBDTs extend decision trees with a grammar framework. Logical expressions derived from a context-free grammar are used for branching in place of simple thresholds on attributes. The added expressivity enables support for a wide range of data types while retaining the interpretability of decision trees. In particular, when a grammar based on temporal logic is used, we show that GBDTs can be used for the interpretable classi cation of high-dimensional and heterogeneous time series data. Furthermore, we show how GBDTs can also be used for categorization, which is a combination of clustering and generating interpretable explanations for each cluster. We apply GBDTs to analyze the classic Australian Sign Language dataset as well as data on near mid-air collisions (NMACs). The NMAC data comes from aircraft simulations used in the development of the next-generation Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS X).Comment: 9 pages, 5 figures, 2 tables, SIAM International Conference on Data Mining (SDM) 201

On Language Processors and Software Maintenance

This work investigates declarative transformation tools in the context of software maintenance. Besides maintenance of the language specification, evolution of a software language requires the adaptation of the software written in that language as well as the adaptation of the software that transforms software written in the evolving language. This co-evolution is studied to derive automatic adaptations of artefacts from adaptations of the language specification. Furthermore, AOP for Prolog is introduced to improve maintainability of language specifications and derived tools.Die Arbeit unterstützt deklarative Transformationswerkzeuge im Kontext der Softwarewartung. Neben der Wartung der Sprachbeschreibung erfordert die Evolution einer Sprache sowohl die Anpassung der Software, die in dieser Sprache geschrieben ist als auch die Anpassung der Software, die diese Software transformiert. Diese Koevolution wird untersucht, um automatische Anpassungen von Artefakten von Anpassungen der Sprachbeschreibungen abzuleiten. Weiterhin wird AOP für Prolog eingeführt, um die Wartbarkeit von Sprachbeschreibungen und den daraus abgeleiteten Werkzeugen zu erhöhen

The Rascal Language Workbench

Rascal is a programming language for source code analysis and transformation. This means that typically the input of a Rascal program is a program in some programming language, and the output is often yet another program. So Rascal is a meta programming language. Source code is thus primary object of manipulation in Rascal. Many of the use cases that Rascal is designed to address, follow the Extract-Analyze- SYnthesize, or EASY paradigm (shown in Figure 1.1). Meta programs often start by extracting information (facts) from the input program. This is the extraction phase. An example could be the call-graph of a program. Then, this extracted information is often subject to analysis: derived facts are computed, the information is enriched. For the call graph, a simple analysis is determining the root or leaf routines in the a source program by analysing the extracted call-graph. Another analysis could be concerned by identifying routines that are never called (dead code). Finally, the meta program will synthesize some kind of result. This can be transformed source code (e.g., removal of dead code from the input program), a report (e.g., statistics on the number of root and leaf routines), or a visualization (e.g., a graphical depiction of the call-graph). Of course, these phases are not strictly sequential: there may be feedback loops. Some analysis leads to new extraction, synthesis of a result may lead to new analyses and so on. Rascal has elaborated features to support each of the phases of the EASY paradigm fully integrated in the language. Naturally, the implementation of domain specific languages (DSLs), or more generally, modeldriven engineering (MDE) fits the EASY paradigm very well. When implementing a DSL compiler or interpreter the input is, of course, DSL source code. Extraction could, for instance, include the derivation of an AST from the concrete syntax tree. Another extracted model could be a graph-like structure representing the input in a more abstract way, or a performance model. Such abstractions are input to analyses such as constraint checking or type checking, verification, quality-of-service analysis etc. Finally, synthesis covers tasks such as graphical visualization, code generation, and optimization. To conclude, in the context of Rascal, we see DSL implementation as an instance of source code analysis and transformation

Generalizing input-driven languages: theoretical and practical benefits

Regular languages (RL) are the simplest family in Chomsky's hierarchy. Thanks to their simplicity they enjoy various nice algebraic and logic properties that have been successfully exploited in many application fields. Practically all of their related problems are decidable, so that they support automatic verification algorithms. Also, they can be recognized in real-time. Context-free languages (CFL) are another major family well-suited to formalize programming, natural, and many other classes of languages; their increased generative power w.r.t. RL, however, causes the loss of several closure properties and of the decidability of important problems; furthermore they need complex parsing algorithms. Thus, various subclasses thereof have been defined with different goals, spanning from efficient, deterministic parsing to closure properties, logic characterization and automatic verification techniques. Among CFL subclasses, so-called structured ones, i.e., those where the typical tree-structure is visible in the sentences, exhibit many of the algebraic and logic properties of RL, whereas deterministic CFL have been thoroughly exploited in compiler construction and other application fields. After surveying and comparing the main properties of those various language families, we go back to operator precedence languages (OPL), an old family through which R. Floyd pioneered deterministic parsing, and we show that they offer unexpected properties in two fields so far investigated in totally independent ways: they enable parsing parallelization in a more effective way than traditional sequential parsers, and exhibit the same algebraic and logic properties so far obtained only for less expressive language families