. D. Decouchant, P. Le Dot, M. Riveill, C. Roisin and X. Rousset de Pina. A Synchronization Mechanism for an Object-Oriented Distributed System, Proc. of the 11th IEEE Conference on Distributed Computing, May 1991  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....code and synchronization code. This strict separation makes it much easier to construct a synchronization scheme that is much more resistant to inheritance anomalies. Examples of Method Guard implementations are the Counter Variables by Gerber [3] Synchronization Counters by Decouchant et.al. [1], ESP by MacHale [4] and Abstractions for Synchronization by Geib Courtrai [2] The Synchronizing Actions by Neusius [8] are a mixture of Method Guards and Accept Sets. Event Driven Synchronization Despite the difference between the two mechanisms they have one in common: the synchronization ....

D. Decouchant et al.: "A Synchronization Mechanism for an Object Oriented Distributed System", 11th Int. Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, IEEE, 1991

....in writing concurrent programs is the specification of synchronization code. It is therefore most desirable to avoid re writing of such code and to exploit inheritance for code reuse. The conflict between inheritance and synchronization mechanisms has been reported by many researchers [7, 13, 17, 26, 32, 33, 34, 41, 43]. Tomlinson and Singh [41] define a synchronization mechanism as interfering with inheritance if local changes in the inheritance hierarchy (for example, adding a new method to a subclass) require changes in the synchronization constraints elsewhere in the hierarchy. Because of this interference, ....

....critical sections imposed by the superclasses, hence violating the principles of encapsulation. In the case of objects changing their interface, addition of a new method requires changes in the superclass methods. Many proposals have posited solutions to this problem, with only a partial success [13, 17, 26, 33, 34, 41]. Matsuoka, Yonezawa, and Wakita [32, 33] formally prove the conflict between inheritance and synchronization mechanisms and present counter examples to many of the proposed solutions. Present COOPLs either do not address this conflict or provide a partial solution to minimize its effect. 4 ....

D. Decouchant, P. Le Dor, M. Riveill, C. Roisin, and X. Rousset de Pina, A Synchronization Mechanism for an Object-Oriented Distributed System, 11th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, IEEE 1991, pp. 152-159.

.... where he can forget implementation details and often describe the synchronization constraints in a synthetic manner (see Figure 3, section a buffer with Guide ) But, above all, this kind of control presents the advantage of promoting synchronization reuse ; many works attest this property [17, 20, 10, 22, 11, 16]. However, the debate is far from being closed : a lot of implicit control frameworks (abstractions) exist (path expressions [4] synchronization counters [21, 18] behavior abstractions [15] just to name a few) each 5 one having a different expressive power, and different properties regarding ....

D. Decouchant, P. Le Dot, M. Riveill, C. Roisin, and X. Rousset de Pina. A Synchronization Mechanism for an Object-Oriented Distributed System. In Eleventh International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems. IEEE, 1991.

....synchronization. It usually provides the programmer with a consistent framework, where he can forget implementation details and often describe the synchronization constraints in a very synthetic and problem adapted manner. But above all, this kind of control promotes synchronization reuse [27, 28, 17, 29, 18, 26]. In Eiffel , implicit control is available by means of user level defined abstractions [11, 2] Apart from deriving his processes directly from process and programming explicitly the control, a user can derive his classes from these more general abstract frameworks. They are derived from the ....

D. Decouchant, P. Le Dot, M. Riveill, C. Roisin, and X. Rousset de Pina. A Synchronization Mechanism for an Object-Oriented Distributed System. In IEEE Eleventh International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, 1991.

....body) in a superclass may be bound to a different behavior in subclasses. Therefore, the synchronization constraints associated with that name may need to change in subclasses. Integration of inheritance and synchronization constraints has been investigated in a number of recent papers [13] [4] [16] 12] However, all of these proposals are insufficient since they do not support incremental modification of synchronization constraints. In all of the proposals, synchronization constraints are specified as activation conditions: a boolean expression associated with each method. The ....

....the same kind of thread control and is the strategy used in Beta, PROCOL [22] and POOL I [1] In some languages, thread control is user defined and often described within the constructs that define synchronization constraints for classes of objects. Userdefined thread control is possible in Guide [4], Mediators [6] and Synchronizing Actions [13] We have ignored thread control for reasons of simplicity.However, in the conclusion we argue that user defined thread control can in fact be smoothly incorporated into our framework. Objects are instantiated from classes. Classes may be ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

D. Decouchant, P. Le Dot, M. Rivelli, C. Roisin, and X. Rousset de Pina. A Synchronization Mechanism for an Object Oriented Distributed System. In Eleventh International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems. IEEE, 1991.

....Synchronization Data indicates that the buffer is empty. Note that operations preGuard or postGuard should be redefined if state corruption can result from the concurrent execution of produce or consume operations. Synchronization Counters. Several concurrent objectoriented languages, e.g. Guide [6], provide synchronization counters which count, for each type of invocation, the number of pending, executing and finished invocations. Specializations of class Synchronization Data can implement synchronization counters using an attribute for each counter. Moreover, it is necessary that ....

D. Decouchant, P. Le Dot, M. Riveill, C. Roisin, and X. Rousset de Pina. A synchronization mechanism for an object-oriented distributed system. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 152--159, Arlington, Texas, USA, May 1991.

.... mutual exclusion in Modula2 [8] and semaphores in the Comandos Virtual Machine [9] The synchronization mechanism presented in this paper has initially been designed for the first version of the Guide distributed object oriented system implemented at Bull IMAG (Grenoble) and described in [10]. The paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we briefly present the Eliott Virtual Machine, second version of the Guide system. In section 3, we present the expression of the synchronization for shared objects in the Guide language. In section 4, we present the extension to the Eliott ....

D. Decouchant, P. Le Dot, M. Riveill, C. Roisin, X. Rousset de Pina, "A synchronization mechanism for an object oriented distributed system", 11th ICDCS, mai 1991.

No context found.

D. Decouchant, P. Le Dot, M. Riveill, C. Roisin, X. Rousset de Pina, A Synchronization Mechanism for an Object Oriented Distributed System, Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pp. 152-159, IEEE Computer Society Press, Arlington (Texas), May 1991.

....on access concurrency. 6.4 Synchronisation mechanism Object sharing must be controlled in order to ensure that the shared data remain in a consistent state and for serializing concurrent calls. This is achieved by synchronization constraints associated with each method of a shared object [7] [5] Thus, the data of an object may be accessed according to a specific policy, such as readers and writers policy, mutual exclusion or a more complex, application dependent, policy. Specifically, Griffon uses read write lock for accessing shared fragments and a producer consumer ....

D. Decouchant, P. Le Dot, M. Riveill, C. Roisin, X. Rousset de Pina, A Synchronization Mechanism for an Object Oriented Distributed System, 11th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, Arlington (Texas), pp. 152-159, 20-24 May 1991.

No context found.

. D. Decouchant, P. Le Dot, M. Riveill, C. Roisin and X. Rousset de Pina. A Synchronization Mechanism for an Object-Oriented Distributed System, Proc. of the 11th IEEE Conference on Distributed Computing, May 1991

No context found.

D. Decouchant, P. Le Dot, M. Riveill, C. Roisin, and X. Rousset de Pina. A Synchronization Mechanism for an Object Oriented Distributed System. In Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 152--159. IEEE, May 1991.

No context found.

D. Decouchant, P. Le Dor, M. Riveill, C. Roisin, and X. Rousset de Pina, A Synchronization Mechanism for an Object-Oriented Distributed System, 11th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, IEEE 1991, pp. 152-159.

No context found.

D. Decouchant, P. Le Dot, M. Riveill, C. Roisin, and X. Rousset de Pina. A Synchronization Mechanism for an Object Oriented Distributed System. In Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 152--159. IEEE, May 1991.

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