Towards an aspect weaving BPEL engine

This position paper proposes the use of dynamic aspects and the visitor design pattern to obtain a highly configurable and extensible BPEL engine. Using these two techniques, the core of this infrastructural software can be customised to meet new requirements and add features such as debugging, execution monitoring, or changing to another Web Service selection policy. Additionally, it can easily be extended to cope with customer-specific BPEL extensions. We propose the use of dynamic aspects not only on the engine itself but also on the workflow in order to tackle the problems of Web Service hot deployment and hot fixes to long running processes. In this way, composing aWeb Service "on-the-fly" means weaving its choreography interface into the workflow

Systematic composition of distributed objects: Processes and sessions

We consider a system with the infrastructure for the creation and interconnection of large numbers of distributed persistent objects. This system is exemplified by the Internet: potentially, every appliance and document on the Internet has both persistent state and the ability to interact with large numbers of other appliances and documents on the Internet. This paper elucidates the characteristics of such a system, and proposes the compositional requirements of its corresponding infrastructure. We explore the problems of specifying, composing, reasoning about and implementing applications in such a system. A specific concern of our research is developing the infrastructure to support structuring distributed applications by using sequential, choice and parallel composition, in the anarchic environment where application compositions may be unforeseeable and interactions may be unknown prior to actually occurring. The structuring concepts discussed are relevant to a wide range of distributed applications; our implementation is illustrated with collaborative Java processes interacting over the Internet, but the methodology provided can be applied independent of specific platforms

What Java Developers Know About Compatibility, And Why This Matters

Real-world programs are neither monolithic nor static -- they are constructed using platform and third party libraries, and both programs and libraries continuously evolve in response to change pressure. In case of the Java language, rules defined in the Java Language and Java Virtual Machine Specifications define when library evolution is safe. These rules distinguish between three types of compatibility - binary, source and behavioural. We claim that some of these rules are counter intuitive and not well-understood by many developers. We present the results of a survey where we quizzed developers about their understanding of the various types of compatibility. 414 developers responded to our survey. We find that while most programmers are familiar with the rules of source compatibility, they generally lack knowledge about the rules of binary and behavioural compatibility. This can be problematic when organisations switch from integration builds to technologies that require dynamic linking, such as OSGi. We have assessed the gravity of the problem by studying how often linkage-related problems are referenced in issue tracking systems, and find that they are common

Functional programming languages for verification tools: experiences with ML and Haskell

We compare Haskell with ML as programming languages for verification tools, based on our experience developing TRUTH in Haskell and the Edinburgh Concurrency Workbench (CWB) in ML. We discuss not only technical language features but also the "worlds" of the languages, for example, the availability of tools and libraries