Two programming paradigms are gaining attention in the overlapping fields of software product lines (SPLs) and incremental software development (ISD). Feature-oriented programming (FOP) aims at large-scale compositional programming and feature modularity in SPLs using ISD. Aspect-oriented programming (AOP) focuses on the modularization of crosscutting concerns in complex software. Although feature modules, the main abstraction mechanisms of FOP, perform well in implementing large-scale software building blocks, they are incapable of modularizing certain kinds of crosscutting concerns. This weakness is exactly the strength of aspects, the main abstraction mechanisms of AOP. We contribute a systematic evaluation and comparison of FOP and AOP. It reveals that aspects and feature modules are complementary techniques. Consequently, we propose the symbiosis of FOP and AOP and aspectual feature modules (AFMs), a programming technique that integrates feature modules and aspects. We provide a set of tools that support implementing AFMs on top of Java and C++. We apply AFMs to a nontrivial case study demonstrating their practical applicability and to justify our design choices.

In the context of statically-typed, class-based languages, we investigate classes that can be extended with trait composition. A trait is a collection of methods without state; it can be viewed as an incomplete stateless class. Traits can be composed in any order, but only make sense when imported by a class that provides state variables and additional methods to disambiguate conflicting names arising between the imported traits. We introduce FeatherTrait Java (FTJ), a conservative extension of the simple lightweight class-based calculus Featherweight Java (FJ) with statically-typed traits. In FTJ, classes can be built using traits as basic behavioral bricks; method conflicts between imported traits must be resolved explicitly by the user either by (i) aliasing or excluding method names in traits, or by (ii) overriding explicitly the conflicting methods in the class or in the trait itself. We present an operational semantics with a lookup algorithm, and a sound type system that guarantees that evaluating a well-typed expression never yields a message-not-understood run-time error nor gets the interpreter stuck. We give examples of the increased expressive power of the trait-based inheritance model. The resulting calculus appears to be a good starting point for a rigorous mathematical analysis of typed class-based languages featuring trait-based inheritance.

A feature-oriented product line is a family of programs that share a common set of features. A feature implements a stakeholder’s requirement and represents a design decision or configuration option. When added to a program, a feature involves the introduction of new structures, such as classes and methods, and the refinement of existing ones, such as extending methods. A feature-oriented decomposition enables a generator to create an executable program by composing feature code solely on the basis of the feature selection of a user – no other information needed. A key challenge of product line engineering is to guarantee that only well-typed programs are generated. As the number of valid feature combinations grows combinatorially with the number of features, it is not feasible to type check all programs individually. The only feasible approach is to have a type system check the entire code base of the feature-oriented product line. We have developed such a type system on the basis of a formal model of a feature-oriented Java-like language. The type system guaranties type safety for feature-oriented product lines. That is, it ensures that every valid program of a well-typed product line is well-typed. Our formal model including type system is sound and complete.

Traits are fine-grained components that can be used to compose classes, while avoiding many of the problems of multiple inheritance and mixin-based approaches. Since most implementations of traits have focused on dynamically-typed languages, the question naturally arises, how can one best introduce traits to statically-typed languages, like Java and C#? In this paper we argue that the flattening property of traits should be used as a guiding principle for any attempt to add traits to statically-typed languages. This property essentially states that, semantically, traits can be compiled away. We demonstrate how this principle applies to Featherweight-Trait Java, a conservative extension to Featherweight Java.

Although the C-based interpreter of Python is reasonably fast, implementations on the CLI or the JVM platforms offers some advantages in terms of robustness and interoperability. Unfortunately, because the CLI and JVM are primarily designed to execute statically typed, object-oriented languages, most dynamic language implementations cannot use the native bytecodes for common operations like method calls and exception handling; as a result, they are not able to take full advantage of the power offered by the CLI and JVM. We describe a different approach that attempts to preserve the flexibility of Python, while still allowing for efficient execution. This is achieved by limiting the use of the more dynamic features of Python to an initial, bootstrapping phase. This phase is used to construct a final RPython (Restricted Python) program that is actually executed. RPython is a proper subset of Python, is statically typed, and does not allow dynamic modification of class or method definitions; however, it can still take advantage of Python features such as mixins and first-class methods and classes. This paper presents an overview of RPython, including its design and its translation to both CLI and JVM bytecode. We show how the bootstrapping phase can be used to implement advanced features, like extensible classes and generative programming. We also discuss what work remains before RPython is truly ready for general use, and compare the performance of RPython with that of other approaches.

Through implicit invocation, procedures are called without explicitly referencing them. Implicit announcement adds to this implicitness by not only keeping implicit which procedures are called, but also where or when — under implicit invocation with implicit announcement, the call site contains no signs of that, or what it calls. Recently, aspect-oriented programming has popularized implicit invocation with implicit announcement as a possibility to separate concerns that lead to interwoven code if conventional programming techniques are used. However, as has been noted elsewhere, as currently implemented it establishes strong implicit dependencies between components, hampering independent software development and evolution. To address this problem, we present a type-based modularization of implicit invocation with implicit announcement that is inspired by how interfaces and exceptions are realized in JAVA. By extending an existing compiler and by rewriting several programs to make use of our proposed language constructs, we found that the imposed declaration clutter tends to be moderate; in particular, we found that for general applications of implicit invocation with implicit announcement, fears that programs utilizing our form of modularization become unreasonably verbose are unjustified.

Software-product-line engineering is an efficient means to generate a family of program variants for a domain from a single code base. However, because of the potentially high number of possible program variants, it is difficult to test them all and ensure properties like type safety for the entire product line. We present a product-line–aware type system that can type check an entire software product line without generating each variant in isolation. Specifically, we extend the Featherweight Java calculus with feature annotations for product-line development and prove formally that all program variants generated from a well-typed product line are well-typed. Furthermore, we present a solution to the problem of typing mutually exclusive features. We discuss how results from our formalization helped implementing our own product-line tool CIDE for full Java and report of experience with detecting type errors in four existing software-product-line implementations.

cJ is an extension of Java that allows supertypes, fields, and methods of a class or interface to be provided only under some static subtyping condition. For instance, a cJ generic class, C<P>, may provide a member method m only when the type provided for parameter P is a subtype of a specific typeQ. From a practical standpoint, cJ adds to generic Java classes and interfaces the ability to express case-specific code. Unlike conditional compilation techniques (e.g., the C/C++ “#ifdef ” construct) cJ is statically type safe and maintains the modular typechecking properties of Java generic classes: a cJ generic class can be checked independently of the code that uses it. Just like regular Java, checking a cJ class implies that all uses are safe, under the contract for type parameters specified in the class’s signature. As a specific application, cJ addresses the well-known shortcomings of the Java Collections Framework (JCF). JCF data structures often throw run-time errors when an “optional ” method is called upon an object that does not support it. Within the constraints of standard Java, the authors of the JCF had to either sacrifice static type safety or suffer a combinatorial explosion of the number of types involved. cJ avoids both problems, maintaining both static safety and conciseness.

Abstract. In many domains, classes have highly regular internal structure. For example, so-called business objects often contain boilerplate code for mapping database fields to class members. The boilerplate code must be repeated per-field for every class, because existing mechanisms for constructing classes do not provide a way to capture and reuse such member-level structure. As a result, programmers often resort to ad hoc code generation. This paper presents a lightweight mechanism for specifying and reusing member-level structure in Java programs. The proposal is based on a modest extension to traits that we have termed trait-based metaprogramming. Although the semantics of the mechanism are straightforward, its type theory is difficult to reconcile with nominal subtyping. We achieve reconciliation by introducing a hybrid structural/nominal type system that extends Java’s type system. The paper includes a formal calculus defined by translation to Featherweight Generic Java. 1

Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.