Scala Server Faces

Progress in the Java language has been slow over the last few years. Scala is emerging as one of the probable successors for Java with features such as type inference, higher order functions, closure support and sequence comprehensions. This allows object-oriented yet concise code to be written using Scala. While Java based MVC frameworks are still prevalent, Scala based frameworks along with Ruby on Rails, Django and PHP are emerging as competitors. Scala has a web framework called Lift which has made an attempt to borrow the advantages of other frameworks while keeping code concise. Since Sun’s MVC framework, Java Server Faces 2.0 and its future versions seem to be heading in a reasonably progressive direction; I have developed a framework which attempts to overcome its limitations. I call such a framework ―Scala Server Faces‖. This framework provides a way of writing Java EE applications in Scala yet borrow from the concept of ―convention over configuration‖ followed by rival web frameworks. Again, an Eclipse tool is provided to make the programmer\u27s task of writing code on the popular Eclipse platform. Scala Server Faces, the framework and the tool allows the programmer to write enterprise web applications in Scala by providing features such as templating support, CRUD screen generation for database model objects, an Ant script to help deployment and integration with the Glassfish Application Server

Ghost: A uniform and general-purpose proxy implementation

International audienceA proxy object is a surrogate or placeholder that controls access to another target object. Proxy objects are a widely used solution for different scenarios such as remote method invocation, future objects, behavioral reflection, object databases, inter-languages communications and bindings, access control, lazy or parallel evaluation, security, among others. Most proxy implementations support proxies for regular objects but are unable to create proxies for objects with an important role in the runtime infrastructure such as classes or methods. Proxies can be complex to install, they can have a significant overhead, they can be limited to certain kind of classes, etc. Moreover, proxy implementations are often not stratified and they do not have a clear separation between proxies (the objects intercepting messages) and handlers (the objects handling interceptions). In this paper, we present Ghost: a uniform and general-purpose proxy implementation for the Pharo programming language. Ghost provides low memory consuming proxies for regular objects as well as for classes and methods. When a proxy takes the place of a class, it intercepts both the messages received by the class and the lookup of methods for messages received by its instances. Similarly, if a proxy takes the place of a method, then the method execution is intercepted too

Run-time Variability with First-class Contexts

Software must be regularly updated to keep up with changing requirements. Unfortunately, to install an update, the system must usually be restarted, which is inconvenient and costly. In this dissertation, we aim at overcoming the need for restart by enabling run-time changes at the programming language level. We argue that the best way to achieve this goal is to improve the support for encapsulation, information hiding and late binding by contextualizing behavior. In our approach, behavioral variations are encapsulated into context objects that alter the behavior of other objects locally. We present three contextual language features that demonstrate our approach. First, we present a feature to evolve software by scoping variations to threads. This way, arbitrary objects can be substituted over time without compromising safety. Second, we present a variant of dynamic proxies that operate by delegation instead of forwarding. The proxies can be used as building blocks to implement contextualization mechanisms from within the language. Third, we contextualize the behavior of objects to intercept exchanges of references between objects. This approach scales information hiding from objects to aggregates. The three language features are supported by formalizations and case studies, showing their soundness and practicality. With these three complementary language features, developers can easily design applications that can accommodate run-time changes

A Type System for First-Class Layers with Inheritance, Subtyping, and Swapping

Context-Oriented Programming (COP) is a programming paradigm to encourage modularization of context-dependent software. Key features of COP are layers---modules to describe context-dependent behavioral variations of a software system---and their dynamic activation, which can modify the behavior of multiple objects that have already been instantiated. Typechecking programs written in a COP language is difficult because the activation of a layer can even change objects' interfaces. Inoue et al. have informally discussed how to make JCop, an extension of Java for COP by Appeltauer et al., type-safe. In this article, we formalize a small COP language called ContextFJ$_{<:}$ with its operational semantics and type system and show its type soundness. The language models main features of the type-safe version of JCop, including dynamically activated first-class layers, inheritance of layer definitions, layer subtyping, and layer swapping

Reify Your Collection Queries for Modularity and Speed!

Modularity and efficiency are often contradicting requirements, such that programers have to trade one for the other. We analyze this dilemma in the context of programs operating on collections. Performance-critical code using collections need often to be hand-optimized, leading to non-modular, brittle, and redundant code. In principle, this dilemma could be avoided by automatic collection-specific optimizations, such as fusion of collection traversals, usage of indexing, or reordering of filters. Unfortunately, it is not obvious how to encode such optimizations in terms of ordinary collection APIs, because the program operating on the collections is not reified and hence cannot be analyzed. We propose SQuOpt, the Scala Query Optimizer--a deep embedding of the Scala collections API that allows such analyses and optimizations to be defined and executed within Scala, without relying on external tools or compiler extensions. SQuOpt provides the same "look and feel" (syntax and static typing guarantees) as the standard collections API. We evaluate SQuOpt by re-implementing several code analyses of the Findbugs tool using SQuOpt, show average speedups of 12x with a maximum of 12800x and hence demonstrate that SQuOpt can reconcile modularity and efficiency in real-world applications.Comment: 20 page

Flexible Correct-by-Construction Programming

Correctness-by-Construction (CbC) is an incremental program construction process to construct functionally correct programs. The programs are constructed stepwise along with a specification that is inherently guaranteed to be satisfied. CbC is complex to use without specialized tool support, since it needs a set of predefined refinement rules of fixed granularity which are additional rules on top of the programming language. Each refinement rule introduces a specific programming statement and developers cannot depart from these rules to construct programs. CbC allows to develop software in a structured and incremental way to ensure correctness, but the limited flexibility is a disadvantage of CbC. In this work, we compare classic CbC with CbC-Block and TraitCbC. Both approaches CbC-Block and TraitCbC, are related to CbC, but they have new language constructs that enable a more flexible software construction approach. We provide for both approaches a programming guideline, which similar to CbC, leads to well-structured programs. CbC-Block extends CbC by adding a refinement rule to insert any block of statements. Therefore, we introduce CbC-Block as an extension of CbC. TraitCbC implements correctness-by-construction on the basis of traits with specified methods. We formally introduce TraitCbC and prove soundness of the construction strategy. All three development approaches are qualitatively compared regarding their programming constructs, tool support, and usability to assess which is best suited for certain tasks and developers.Comment: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2204.0564