David Clarke. Ownership and Containment. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 2001. Submitted.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

No context found.

David Clarke. Ownership and Containment. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 2001. Submitted.

No context found.

Dave Clarke. Object ownership and containment. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, Australia, 2002.

....a program. The second approach to managing aliasing employs alias encapsulation, as exemplified by ownership types [15] Simply put, these impose a form of object level privacy by preventing objects (rather than just fields) from being accessed outside of their enclosing encapsulation boundaries [15, 32, 13, 8, 6, 14, 1]. Ownership types have been employed for reasoning about programs [14, 32] for alias management [15, 33] in program understanding [1] to eliminate data races [8] and deadlocks [6] from concurrent programs, and to enable safe lazy updates in object oriented databases [7] Existing attempts to ....

....owner is outside of itself, or alternatively, an object cannot be accessed from outside of its owner. The owner can be seen as the permission required to access an object, and an object s position in the inside relation determines whether the object has enough permission. A nice little theorem [34, 13] states that if we have all of these conditions, then an object s owner will be on all paths from the root of the graph to that object, which is to say that an object s owner is its dominator. We call this property owners as dominators, and type systems which enjoy it are said to o#er deep ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

David Clarke. Ownership and Containment. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 2001.

....owner is outside of itself, or alternatively, an object cannot be accessed from outside of its owner. The owner can be seen as the permission required to access an object, and an object s position in the inside relation determines whether the object has enough permission. A nice little theorem [30, 12] states that if we have all of these conditions, then an object s owner will be on all paths from the root of the graph to that object, which is to say that an object s owner is its dominator. We call this property owners as dominators, and type systems which enjoy it are said to o er deep ....

....an object. Without this requirement, we would lose deep ownership. In summary, an object may only refer to objects that it owns (i.e. objects of types with this as owner) or to objects owned by any of its parameters. More detailed descriptions of ownership types are available in the literature [12, 13]. 4. EXTERNAL UNIQUENESS We propose a new form of uniqueness which we call external uniqueness in which a reference is externally unique if it is the only external reference to an object. Internal aliasing to the object from its owner representation is still permitted, because such references ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

David Clarke. Ownership and Containment. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 2001.

.... ( 0 )g. 7. Therefore owner ( 0 ) 2 [ hq i] where q = rep ( 8. Unravelling the de nition of [ hq i] we get rep ( owner ( 0 ) as required. This proof technique generalises to the type system of companion work [13] This will appear in the rst author s thesis [14]. 7 Related Work The pointer structures within object oriented programs have received surprisingly little examination over the last decade much less interest than has been lavished on the more tractable problem of inheritance relationships between classes. Good surveys of the problems caused ....

David Clarke. Object Ownership and Containment. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 2001. In preparation.

....in our earlier work. The formal development presented here seems to be correct, though it s properties have not been formally demonstrated. The reader is refered to an earlier work [5] for a more thorough development which does not venture as far as this does, or to the soon to appear thesis [8]. 1 Introduction Before starting, let s x some terminology. Rather than consider objects to be without structure, we exploit the nesting inherent in the notion of aggregation used in object oriented design [12] An aggregate object consists of one or more interface objects and a collection of ....

David G. Clarke. Ownership and Containment. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 2001. In preparation.

.... , so that an object can access itself, following the initial model. Indeed, the initial model can be embedded into this system by (1) guaranteeing that each object has a unique representation context, and (2) by ensuring that rep( is directly inside owner( for all objects (for details see [10]) So it is when the representation context is not directly inside the owner context, or when the representation context is not unique, that we obtain exibility to, for example, implement iterators which can access representation. In fact, this is exactly what is happening with the Enumeration ....

....to the representation of v, without v being aware. Furthermore, because the owner of vamp is , it is accessible anywhere. This sort of behaviour can be avoided by encoding method select and eld update of protected objects in terms of expose and then removing expose from the programmer s syntax [10]. However, similar vampiric behaviour can occur whenever new contexts are created inside contexts which are passed as method parameters. Classes rely on this idiom. But, in a language based entirely on classes (which does not allow classes to be de ned inside methods) this vampiric behaviour is ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

David G. Clarke. Ownership and Containment. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 2001. In preparation.

No context found.

David Clarke. Object Ownership and Containment. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 2001.

No context found.

David Clarke. Object Ownership and Containment. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 2001.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC