JVM-hosted languages: They talk the talk, but do they walk the walk?

The rapid adoption of non-Java JVM languages is impressive: major international corporations are staking critical parts of their software infrastructure on components built from languages such as Scala and Clojure. However with the possible exception of Scala, there has been little academic consideration and characterization of these languages to date. In this paper, we examine four nonJava JVM languages and use exploratory data analysis techniques to investigate differences in their dynamic behavior compared to Java. We analyse a variety of programs and levels of behavior to draw distinctions between the different programming languages. We briefly discuss the implications of our findings for improving the performance of JIT compilation and garbage collection on the JVM platform

Core language for web applications

Trabalho apresentado no âmbito do Mestrado em Engenharia Informática, como requisito parcial para obtenção do grau de Mestre em Engenharia InformáticaWeb applications have a very high demand for rapid development and constant change. Several languages were created for this kind of applications, which are very flexible but many times trade the benefits of strongly-typed programming languages by untyped interpreted languages. With this kind of languages the interaction between different layers in a web application is usually developed using dialects and programming conventions with no real mechanical verifications between the client and server sides, and the SQL code within the application and the database. We present a typed core language for web applications that integrates the typing of the interface definition, business logic, and database manipulation representing these interactions at a high abstract level. Using only one language, typed and with its own instructions to define the interface and the interaction with the database, becomes possible to make static checks. Thereby, avoiding execution errors caused by the usual heterogeneity among web applications. We also describe the implementation of a prototype with a highly flexible programming environment for our language that allows the application development and publishing tasks to be done through a web interface, interacting directly with the application and without loosing the integrity checks. This kind of development relies on an agile development methodology. Therefore, the modifications made to the application are made active using the dynamic reconfiguration mechanism, avoiding the recompilation of the application and system restart

Static Analysis for Ruby in the Presence of Gradual Typing

Dynamic languages provide new challenges to traditional static analysis techniques, leaving most errors to be detected at runtime and making many properties of code difficult to infer. Ruby code usually takes advantage of both dynamic typing and metaprogramming to produce elegant yet difficult-to-analyze programs. Function evalpq and its variants, which usually foil static analysis, are used frequently as a primitive runtime macro system. The goal of this thesis is to answer the question: What useful information about real-world Ruby programs can be determined statically with a high degree of accuracy? Two observations lead to a number of statically-discoverable errors and properties in parseable Ruby programs. The first is that many interesting properties of a program can be discovered through traditional static analysis techniques despite the presence of dynamic typing. The second is that most metaprogramming occurs when the program files are loaded and not during the execution of the main program. Traditional techniques, such as flow analysis and Static Single Assignment transformations aid extraction of program invariants, including both explicitly programmed constants and those implicitly defined by Ruby\u27s semantics. A meaningful, well-defined distinction between load time and run time in Ruby is developed and addresses the second observation. This distinction allows us to statically discern properties of a Ruby program despite many idioms that require dynamic evaluation of code. Lastly, gradual typing through optional annotations improves the quality of error discovery and other statically-inferred properties

Declarative Ajax Web Applications through SQL++ on a Unified Application State

Implementing even a conceptually simple web application requires an inordinate amount of time. FORWARD addresses three problems that reduce developer productivity: (a) Impedance mismatch across the multiple languages used at different tiers of the application architecture. (b) Distributed data access across the multiple data sources of the application (SQL database, user input of the browser page, session data in the application server, etc). (c) Asynchronous, incremental modification of the pages, as performed by Ajax actions. FORWARD belongs to a novel family of web application frameworks that attack impedance mismatch by offering a single unifying language. FORWARD's language is SQL++, a minimally extended SQL. FORWARD's architecture is based on two novel cornerstones: (a) A Unified Application State (UAS), which is a virtual database over the multiple data sources. The UAS is accessed via distributed SQL++ queries, therefore resolving the distributed data access problem. (b) Declarative page specifications, which treat the data displayed by pages as rendered SQL++ page queries. The resulting pages are automatically incrementally modified by FORWARD. User input on the page becomes part of the UAS. We show that SQL++ captures the semi-structured nature of web pages and subsumes the data models of two important data sources of the UAS: SQL databases and JavaScript components. We show that simple markup is sufficient for creating Ajax displays and for modeling user input on the page as UAS data sources. Finally, we discuss the page specification syntax and semantics that are needed in order to avoid race conditions and conflicts between the user input and the automated Ajax page modifications. FORWARD has been used in the development of eight commercial and academic applications. An alpha-release web-based IDE (itself built in FORWARD) enables development in the cloud.Comment: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Database Programming Languages (DBPL 2013), August 30, 2013, Riva del Garda, Trento, Ital

Type Checking and Inference for Dynamic Languages

Object-oriented dynamic languages such as Ruby, Python, and JavaScript provide rapid code development and a high degree of flexibility and agility to the programmer. Some of the their main features include dynamic typing and metaprogramming. In dynamic typing, programmers do not declare or cast types, and types are not known until run time. In addition, an object’s suitability is determined by its methods, as opposed to its class. Metaprogramming dynamically generates code as the program executes, which means that methods and classes can be added and modified at run-time. These features are powerful but lead to a major drawback of dynamic languages: the lack of static types means that type errors can remain latent long into the software development process or even into deployment, especially in the presence of metaprogramming. To bring the benefits of static types to dynamic languages, I present three pieces of work. First, I present the Ruby Type Checker (rtc), a tool that adds type check- ing to Ruby. Rtc addresses the issue of latent type errors by checking all types during run time at method entrance and exit. Thus it checks types later than a purely static system, but earlier than a traditional dynamic type system. Rtc is implemented as a Ruby library and supports type annotations on classes, methods, and objects. Rtc provides a rich type language that includes union and intersection types, higher-order (block) types, and parametric polymorphism, among other features. We applied rtc to several apps and found it effective at checking types. Second, I present Hummingbird, a just-in-time static type checker for dy- namic languages. Hummingbird also prevents latent type errors, and type checks Ruby code even in the presence of metaprogramming, which is not handled by rtc. In Hummingbird, method type signatures are gathered dynamically at run-time, as those methods are created. When a method is called, Hummingbird statically type checks the method body against current type signatures. Thus, Hummingbird provides thorough static checks on a per-method basis, while also allowing arbitrarily complex metaprogramming. We applied Hummingbird to six apps, including three that use Ruby on Rails, a powerful framework that relies heavily on metaprogramming. We found that all apps type check successfully using Hummingbird, and that Hummingbird’s performance overhead is reasonable. Lastly, I present a practical type inference system for Ruby. Although both rtc and Hummingbird are very effective tools for type checking, the programmer must provide the type annotations on the application methods, which may be a time-consuming and error-prone process. Type inference is a generalization of type checking that automatically infers types while performing checking. However, standard type inference often infers types that are overly permissive compared to what a programmer might write, or contain no useful information, such as the bottom type. I first present a standard type inference system for Ruby, where constraints on a method is statically gathered as soon as the method is invoked at run-time, and types are resolved after all constraints have been gathered on all methods. I then build a practical type inference system on top of the standard type inference system. The goal of my practical type inference system is to infer types that are concise and include actual classes when appropriate. Finally, I evaluate my practical type inference system on three Ruby apps and show it to be very effective compared to the standard type inference system. In sum, I believe that rtc, Hummingbird, and the practical type inference system all take strong steps forward in bringing the benefits of static typing to dynamic languages