Footprints in Local Reasoning

Local reasoning about programs exploits the natural local behaviour common in programs by focussing on the footprint - that part of the resource accessed by the program. We address the problem of formally characterising and analysing the footprint notion for abstract local functions introduced by Calcagno, O Hearn and Yang. With our definition, we prove that the footprints are the only essential elements required for a complete specification of a local function. We formalise the notion of small specifications in local reasoning and show that for well-founded resource models, a smallest specification always exists that only includes the footprints, and also present results for the non-well-founded case. Finally, we use this theory of footprints to investigate the conditions under which the footprints correspond to the smallest safe states. We present a new model of RAM in which, unlike the standard model, the footprints of every program correspond to the smallest safe states, and we also identify a general condition on the primitive commands of a programming language which guarantees this property for arbitrary models.Comment: LMCS 2009 (FOSSACS 2008 special issue

04241 Abstracts Collection -- Graph Transformations and Process Algebras for Modeling Distributed and Mobile Systems

Recently there has been a lot of research, combining concepts of process algebra with those of the theory of graph grammars and graph transformation systems. Both can be viewed as general frameworks in which one can specify and reason about concurrent and distributed systems. There are many areas where both theories overlap and this reaches much further than just using graphs to give a graphic representation to processes. Processes in a communication network can be seen in two different ways: as terms in an algebraic theory, emphasizing their behaviour and their interaction with the environment, and as nodes (or edges) in a graph, emphasizing their topology and their connectedness. Especially topology, mobility and dynamic reconfigurations at runtime can be modelled in a very intuitive way using graph transformation. On the other hand the definition and proof of behavioural equivalences is often easier in the process algebra setting. Also standard techniques of algebraic semantics for universal constructions, refinement and compositionality can take better advantage of the process algebra representation. An important example where the combined theory is more convenient than both alternatives is for defining the concurrent (noninterleaving), abstract semantics of distributed systems. Here graph transformations lack abstraction and process algebras lack expressiveness. Another important example is the work on bigraphical reactive systems with the aim of deriving a labelled transitions system from an unlabelled reactive system such that the resulting bisimilarity is a congruence. Here, graphs seem to be a convenient framework, in which this theory can be stated and developed. So, although it is the central aim of both frameworks to model and reason about concurrent systems, the semantics of processes can have a very different flavour in these theories. Research in this area aims at combining the advantages of both frameworks and translating concepts of one theory into the other. The Dagsuthl Seminar, which took place from 06.06. to 11.06.2004, was aimed at bringing together researchers of the two communities in order to share their ideas and develop new concepts. These proceedings4 of the do not only contain abstracts of the talks given at the seminar, but also summaries of topics of central interest. We would like to thank all participants of the seminar for coming and sharing their ideas and everybody who has contributed to the proceedings

A Trusted Infrastructure for Symbolic Analysis of Event-Driven Web Applications

We introduce a trusted infrastructure for the symbolic analysis of modern event-driven Web applications. This infrastructure consists of reference implementations of the DOM Core Level 1, DOM UI Events, JavaScript Promises and the JavaScript async/await APIs, all underpinned by a simple Core Event Semantics which is sufficiently expressive to describe the event models underlying these APIs. Our reference implementations are trustworthy in that three follow the appropriate standards line-by-line and all are thoroughly tested against the official test-suites, passing all the applicable tests. Using the Core Event Semantics and the reference implementations, we develop JaVerT.Click, a symbolic execution tool for JavaScript that, for the first time, supports reasoning about JavaScript programs that use multiple event-related APIs. We demonstrate the viability of JaVerT.Click by proving both the presence and absence of bugs in real-world JavaScript code

A Trusted Infrastructure for Symbolic Analysis of Event-Driven Web Applications (Artifact)

This artifact contains the implementation of JaVerT.Click, a symbolic analysis tool for modern event-driven Web applications. The tool extends JaVerT 2.0, a state-of-the-art symbolic execution tool for JavaScript (JS), with JS reference implementations of the DOM Core Level 1, DOM UI Events, JavaScript Promises and the JavaScript async/await APIs, all underpinned by a simple Core Event Semantics which is sufficiently expressive to describe the event models underlying these APIs. Our reference implementations mostly follow the respective standards line-by-line and are all thoroughly tested against the official test suite. We also evaluate JaVerT.Click by performing symbolic analysis on two real-world libraries: cash and p-map, finding three previously unknown bugs

TaDA Live: Compositional Reasoning for Termination of Fine-grained Concurrent Programs

We introduce TaDA Live, a separation logic for reasoning compositionally about the termination of blocking fine-grained concurrent programs. The logic contributes several innovations to obtain modular rely/guarantee style reasoning for liveness properties and to blend them with logical atomicity. We illustrate the subtlety of our specifications and reasoning on some paradigmatic examples.Comment: 24 pages, 97 pages including appendi