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

Preventing Atomicity Violations with Contracts

Software developers are expected to protect concurrent accesses to shared regions of memory with some mutual exclusion primitive that ensures atomicity properties to a sequence of program statements. This approach prevents data races but may fail to provide all necessary correctness properties.The composition of correlated atomic operations without further synchronization may cause atomicity violations. Atomic violations may be avoided by grouping the correlated atomic regions in a single larger atomic scope. Concurrent programs are particularly prone to atomicity violations when they use services provided by third party packages or modules, since the programmer may fail to identify which services are correlated. In this paper we propose to use contracts for concurrency, where the developer of a module writes a set of contract terms that specify which methods are correlated and must be executed in the same atomic scope. These contracts are then used to verify the correctness of the main program with respect to the usage of the module(s). If a contract is well defined and complete, and the main program respects it, then the program is safe from atomicity violations with respect to that module. We also propose a static analysis based methodology to verify contracts for concurrency that we applied to some real-world software packages. The bug we found in Tomcat 6.0 was immediately acknowledged and corrected by its development team