1 / 18

Object Invariants in Dynamic Contexts

Object Invariants in Dynamic Contexts. K.R.M. Leino and P. Muller 15-819: Objects and Aspects Presented by Jonathan Aldrich. Outline. Problem Modular enforcement of invariants Separate reasoning with callbacks and inheritance Solution Class invariants Partial packing and unpacking

nsnead
Download Presentation

Object Invariants in Dynamic Contexts

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Object Invariantsin Dynamic Contexts K.R.M. Leino and P. Muller 15-819: Objects and Aspects Presented by Jonathan Aldrich

  2. Outline • Problem • Modular enforcement of invariants • Separate reasoning with callbacks and inheritance • Solution • Class invariants • Partial packing and unpacking • “Ownership” relation • Discussion

  3. Callbacks and Invariants class T { int a, b ; invariant 0 <= a < b public T( ) { a := 0 ; b := 3 ; } public void m(. . .) { int k := 100/(b - a) ; a := a +3 ; P(. . .) ; b := (k + 4) . b ; } } • What if P calls m? • Soundness: Must ensure it doesn’t, or that the invariant is not assumed by m

  4. Inheritance and Invariants class Derived extends Base { int a, b ; invariant 0 <= a < b public void m(. . .) { int k := 100/(b - a) ; super.m(. . .) ; a := a +3 ; P(. . .) ; b := (k + 4) . b ; } } • What about the invariants of Base? • Modularity: would like to assume that super call ensures them • Need notion entering and leaving a class scope

  5. Class Invariants class C extends B { int w ; invariant w < 100 ; . . . } class B extends A { int z ; invariant y < z ; . . . } class A extends object { int x, y ; invariant x < y ; . . . } • inv = A • Invariant A must hold • B and C may or may not hold

  6. Class Invariants class C extends B { int w ; invariant w < 100 ; . . . } class B extends A { int z ; invariant y < z ; . . . } class A extends object { int x, y ; invariant x < y ; . . . } o.z = y+1; pack o as B; pack o as C; continue…

  7. Class Invariants class C extends B { int w ; invariant w < 100 ; . . . } class B extends A { int z ; invariant y < z ; . . . } class A extends object { int x, y ; invariant x < y ; . . . } o.z = y+1; pack o as B; pack o as C; continue…

  8. Class Invariants class C extends B { int w ; invariant w < 100 ; . . . } class B extends A { int z ; invariant y < z ; . . . } class A extends object { int x, y ; invariant x < y ; . . . } o.z = y+1; pack o as B; pack o as C; continue…

  9. Class Invariants class C extends B { int w ; invariant w < 100 ; . . . } class B extends A { int z ; invariant y < z ; . . . } class A extends object { int x, y ; invariant x < y ; . . . } o.z = y+1; pack o as B; pack o as C; continue…

  10. Inheritance and Invariants class Derived extends Base { int a, b ; invariant 0 <= a < b public void m(. . .) { unpackthis from Derived int k := 100/(b - a) ; super.m(. . .) ; // unpacks and re-packs Base a := a +3 ; P(. . .) ; b := (k + 4) . b ; packthis as Derived } } • Incremental unpacking and re-packing supports modular verification

  11. Callbacks and Invariants class T { int a, b ; invariant 0 <= a < b public T( ) { a := 0 ; b := 3 ; } public void m(. . .) requiresthis . inv = T { unpackthis from T ; int k := 100/(b - a) ; a := a +3 ; P(. . .) ; b := (k + 4) . b ; packthis as T ; } } • What if P calls m? • It must first restore the invariant and pack this as T, because m’s precondition assumes that T is packed

  12. Invariants and Sub-objects class BTree { int i ; BTree left, right ; invariant (left != null)  left.i < i  (right != null)  right.i ≥ i ; } • How to ensure invariant modularly? • What if someone modifies left.i without going through the current object?

  13. Ownership, Boogie Style • p is owned by o at T • p.owner = [o,T] • p is committed • p.committed • All invariants hold for committed objects • p.committed  p.inv = type(p) • Object is committed when owner is packed • p.owner = [o,T]  (p.committed  o.inv ≤ T)

  14. Invariants and Sub-objects class BTree { inti ; rep BTree left, right ; invariant left.owner = [this, BTree] ; invariant right.owner = [this, BTree] ; invariant(left != null)  left.i < i  (right != null)  right.i ≥ i ; } • Invariant can rely on owned objects • unpack this, invariants hold for children • children can’t be unpacked (and thus can’t have broken invariants) unless owner is first unpacked

  15. Ownership Transfer transferable class Possession {. . .} class Person { rep Possession possn ; void donateTo(Person p) requires ¬committed È inv = Person ; requires possn = nullÈ Ètype(possn) = Possession ; requires p = null È p = this È ¬p.committed È p.inv = Person ; modifies possn, p.possn ; { unpack this from Person ; unpack p from Person ; unpack possn from Possession ; transfer possn to [p, Person] ; pack possn as Possession ; p.possn := possn ; pack p as Person ; possn := null ; pack this as Person ; } . . . }

  16. Ownership in Boogie Allows external aliases (but can’t mutate through them) Supports ownership transfer Heavyweight: must track precisely Classical Ownership External aliases No ownership transfer Lightweight: can track with types Is “ownership” really Ownership? I find this all a bit misleading… probably better to use a different term

  17. explain visibility rules • field update rules

  18. Discussion • Practicality • Requires very careful tracking of containing object state • Forbids iterators, etc. • Strong conditions for transfer • Lessons for informal reasoning? • Applicability to aspects?

More Related