BDL, a language of distributed reactive objects

We introduce the definition of a language of distributed reactive objects, a Behaviour Description Language (BDL), as a unified medium for specifying, verifying, compiling and validating object-oriented distributed reactive systems. One of the novelties in BDL is its seamless integration into the Unified Modeling Language approach (UML). BDL supports a description of objects interaction which respects both the functional architecture of system designs and the declarative style of diagram descriptions. This support is implemented by means of a partial-order theoretical framework. This framework allows to specify both the causality and the control models of object interactions independently of any hypothesis on the actual configuration of the system. Given the description of such a configuration, the use of BDL offers new perspectives for a flexible verification of systems by modeling them as an asynchronous network of synchronous components. It allows an optimized code generation by using compilation techniques developed for synchronous languages. It permits an accurate validation and test of applications by supporting the manipulation of both causal and control dependencies. BDL aims at maximizing the re-usability of high-level specifications while minimizing programming effort and test-case based validation of distributed systems.

[1]  Michel Augeraud,et al.  BDL: A Language to Control the Behavior of Concurrent Objects , 1997, DSL.

[2]  Bernhard Rumpe,et al.  Towards a Formalization of the Unified Modeling Language , 1997, ECOOP.

[3]  Albert Benveniste,et al.  Compositionality in Dataflow Synchronous Languages: Specification and Code Generation , 1997, COMPOS.

[4]  Dieter Hogrefe,et al.  The CCITT-Specification and Description Language SDL , 1989, Comput. Networks.

[5]  Jean-Marc Jézéquel,et al.  An Approach to Integrate Formal Validation in an OO Life-cycle of Protocols , 1997 .

[6]  Ekkart Rudolph,et al.  Message Sequence Chart: Composition Techniques versus OO-Techniques – 'Tema con Variazioni' – , 1995 .

[7]  Rajeev Alur,et al.  An Analyzer for Message Sequence Charts , 1996, Softw. Concepts Tools.

[8]  Ivar Jacobson,et al.  The unified modeling language reference manual , 2010 .

[9]  E. Allen Emerson,et al.  Computer Aided Verification , 2000, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[10]  Ivar Jacobson,et al.  Object-oriented software engineering - a use case driven approach , 1993, TOOLS.

[11]  Rajeev Alur,et al.  An Analyser for Mesage Sequence Charts , 1996, TACAS.

[12]  Bernhard Rumpe,et al.  Towards a Formalization of theUni ed Modeling Language ? , 1997 .

[13]  Albert Benveniste,et al.  programmi language and its , 2001 .

[14]  Frédéric Boulanger,et al.  Objects and synchronous programming , 1997 .

[15]  Alain Kerbrat,et al.  CADP - A Protocol Validation and Verification Toolbox , 1996, CAV.

[16]  Bran Selic,et al.  Real-time object-oriented modeling , 1994, Wiley professional computing.

[17]  David Harel,et al.  Executable object modeling with statecharts , 1996, Proceedings of IEEE 18th International Conference on Software Engineering.

[18]  Paul Pettersson,et al.  Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems: 28th International Conference, TACAS 2022, Held as Part of the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software, ETAPS 2022, Munich, Germany, April 2–7, 2022, Proceedings, Part II , 1998, TACAS.

[19]  Leslie Lamport,et al.  Specifying Concurrent Program Modules , 1983, TOPL.

[20]  Simon Pickin,et al.  Introducing formal notations in the development of object-based distributed applications , 1997 .