skip to main content
10.1145/503272.503290acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespoplConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Systematic design of program transformation frameworks by abstract interpretation

Published:01 January 2002Publication History

ABSTRACT

We introduce a general uniform language-independent framework for designing online and offline source-to-source program transformations by abstract interpretation of program semantics. Iterative source-to-source program transformations are designed constructively by composition of source-to-semantics, semantics-to-transformed semantics and semantics-to-source abstractions applied to fixpoint trace semantics. The correctness of the transformations is expressed through observational and performance abstractions. The framework is illustrated on three examples: constant propagation, program specialization by online and offline partial evaluation and static program monitoring.

References

  1. 1.C.Consel and C.Danvy.Tutorial notes on partial evaluation.20 th POPL ,493 -501,1993,ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. 2.C.ConselandS.Khoo.On-line and off-line partial evaluation:Semantics specifications and correctness proofs.J. Func.Prog.,5(4):461 -500,1995.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. 3.P.Cousot.Constructive design of a hierarchy of semantics of atransition system by abstract interpretation.ENTCS ,6,25 p.,1997.http://www.elsevier.nl/locate/entcs/volume6. html .Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.P.Cousot and R.Cousot.Abstract interpretation:a unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction or approximation of .xpoints.4 th POPL ,238 -252,1977, ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. 5.P.Cousot and R.Cousot.Static determination of dynamic properties of recursive procedures.IFIP Conf.on Formal Description of Programming Concepts ,237 -277,1977, North-Holland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.P.Cousot and R.Cousot.Systematic design of program analysis frameworks.6 th POPL ,269 -282,1979,ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. 7.P.Cousot and R.Cousot.Comparing the Galois connection and widening/narrowing approaches to abstract interpretation.PLILP '92 ,LNCS 631,269 -295,1992,Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. 8.P.Cousot and R.Cousot.A case study in abstract interpretation based program transformation:Blocking command elimination.ENTCS ,45,2001.http://www.elsevier.nl/ locate/entcs/volume45.html ,23p.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.L.de Alfaro and Z.Manna.Temporal verification by diagram transformations.CAV '96 ,LNCS 1102,288 -299,1996, Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. 10.U.Erlingsson and F.Schneider.SASI enforcement of security policies:a retrospective.NSPW '99 ,87 -95,1999,ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. 11.N.Halbwachs,F.Lagnier,and P.Raymond.Synchronous observers and the veri .cation of reactive systems. AMAST '93 ,Workshops in Comp.,83 -96,1994,Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. 12.G.Jin,Z.Li,and F.Chen.A theoretical foundation for program transformations to reduce cache thrashing due to true data sharing.Theoret.Comput.Sci.,255(1 -2):449 -481, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. 13.N.Jones.Abstract interpretation and partial evaluation in functional and logic programming.ISLP '94 ,17 -22,1994, MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. 14.N.Jones.An introduction to partial evaluation.ACM Comput.Surv.,28(3):480 -504,1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. 15.N.Jones.Combining abstract interpretation and partial evaluation (brief overview).SAS '97 ,LNCS 1302,396 -405, 1997,Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. 16.N.Jones,C.Gomard,and P.Sestoft.Partial Evaluation and Automatic Program Generation. Prentice-Hall,1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. 17.N.Jones and A.Mycroft.Data flow analysis of applicative programs using minimal function graphs:abridged version. 13 th POPL ,296 -306,1986,ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. 18.G.Kildall.A unified approach to global program optimization.1 st POPL ,194 -206,1973,ACMpress. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. 19.D.Monniaux.Abstract interpretation of probabilistic semantics.SAS '2000 ,LNCS 1824,322 -339,2000,Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. 20.R.Paige.Symbolic finite differencing -part I.ESOP '90 , LNCS 432,36 -56,1990,Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. 21.R.Paige.Future directions in program transformations. ACM SIGPLAN Not.,32(1):94 -97,1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. 22.A.Pnueli,O.Shtrichman,andM.Siegel.The code validation tool CVT:Automatic veri .cation of a compilation process.STTT ,2(2):192 -201,1998.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. 23.J.Reynolds.The discoveries of continuations.Lisp and Symbolic Computation ,6(3/4):233 -248,1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. 24.D.Sands.Proving the correctness of recursion-based automatic program transformations.Theoret.Comput.Sci., 167(1 -2):193 -233,1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. 25.F.Schneider.Enforceable security policies.TISSEC , 3(1):30 -50,2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. 26.P.Steckler and M.Wand.Selective thunkification.SAS '94 , LNCS 864,162 -178.Springer,1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.M.Vardi and P.Wolper.Automata-theoretic techniques for modal logics of programs.J.Comput.System Sci., 32(2):183 -221,1986. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. 28.F.Vedrine.Binding-time analysis and strictness analysis by abstract interpretation.SAS '95 ,LNCS 983,400 -417,1995, Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. 29.P.Wadler.Deforestation:Transforming programs to eliminate trees.Theoret.Comput.Sci.,73(2):231 -248,1990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. 30.M.Weiser.Program slicing.IEEE Trans.Software Engrg., SE-10(4):352 -357,1984.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. 31.H.Yang and Y.Sun.Reverse engineering and reusing Cobol programs:A program transformation approach.IWFM '97 , Electronic Workshops in Computing,1997.http://ewic. org.uk/ewic/workshop/view.cfm/IWFM-97.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  1. Systematic design of program transformation frameworks by abstract interpretation

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        POPL '02: Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages
        January 2002
        351 pages
        ISBN:1581134509
        DOI:10.1145/503272

        Copyright © 2002 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 1 January 2002

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • Article

        Acceptance Rates

        POPL '02 Paper Acceptance Rate28of128submissions,22%Overall Acceptance Rate824of4,130submissions,20%

        Upcoming Conference

        POPL '25

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader