Pandora's Box

HOWARD-60 Pub Date : 2024-04-22 DOI:10.29007/l7kx
R. Middelkoop, C. Huizing, R. Kuiper, E. Luit
{"title":"Pandora's Box","authors":"R. Middelkoop, C. Huizing, R. Kuiper, E. Luit","doi":"10.29007/l7kx","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Irrespective of the many different implementation paradigms, it is important that client level specifications allow to balance freedom from implementation bias and properly restricting the possible implementations to the ones that the client desires. Algebraic specification of the black-box behavior of a system provides just this, if a careful choice of what comprises desired output is made. We propose a new notion, canonicity, to achieve this. We take as client specification an algebraic one, in terms of operators from the client’s problem domain. Such a specification generally has multiple algebras as semantics. Rather than designating a specific one, e.g., the initial one, as implementation, we stay at the level of abstraction of the client specification: input and output are in terms of combinations of operators from the algebra. We use that each algebra determines which combinations of specified operators are equal to others as a first criterion that input/output combinations have to satisfy to qualify as an implementation. Then we argue that for a client only certain combinations of, in a sense, basic operators are acceptable to occur as output. We then investigate a notion of canonicity to make this precise. We thus provide a novel syntax and semantics for client specifications. The semantics matches the client’s view of the implementation as a black box. The paper is structured as follows. We concentrate on looking at algebraic specifications from the perspective of the client and the specifier. In Sect. 2.1, we give a brief overview of firstorder logic, on which algebraic specifications are based. In Sect. 2.2, we discuss and formalize algebraic specifications. We introduce a syntax and semantics of algebraic specifications that regards the implementation as a black box, and that is independent of the implementation language. After this, we briefly consider the step towards OO implementations, in Sect. 3. Sect. 4 contains some thoughts about the consequences of the approach and about future work. We first discuss the meta-level notation that is used.","PeriodicalId":422904,"journal":{"name":"HOWARD-60","volume":"63 4","pages":"258-270"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HOWARD-60","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29007/l7kx","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Irrespective of the many different implementation paradigms, it is important that client level specifications allow to balance freedom from implementation bias and properly restricting the possible implementations to the ones that the client desires. Algebraic specification of the black-box behavior of a system provides just this, if a careful choice of what comprises desired output is made. We propose a new notion, canonicity, to achieve this. We take as client specification an algebraic one, in terms of operators from the client’s problem domain. Such a specification generally has multiple algebras as semantics. Rather than designating a specific one, e.g., the initial one, as implementation, we stay at the level of abstraction of the client specification: input and output are in terms of combinations of operators from the algebra. We use that each algebra determines which combinations of specified operators are equal to others as a first criterion that input/output combinations have to satisfy to qualify as an implementation. Then we argue that for a client only certain combinations of, in a sense, basic operators are acceptable to occur as output. We then investigate a notion of canonicity to make this precise. We thus provide a novel syntax and semantics for client specifications. The semantics matches the client’s view of the implementation as a black box. The paper is structured as follows. We concentrate on looking at algebraic specifications from the perspective of the client and the specifier. In Sect. 2.1, we give a brief overview of firstorder logic, on which algebraic specifications are based. In Sect. 2.2, we discuss and formalize algebraic specifications. We introduce a syntax and semantics of algebraic specifications that regards the implementation as a black box, and that is independent of the implementation language. After this, we briefly consider the step towards OO implementations, in Sect. 3. Sect. 4 contains some thoughts about the consequences of the approach and about future work. We first discuss the meta-level notation that is used.
潘多拉魔盒
不管有多少种不同的实现范式,重要的是,客户级规范必须能够在避免实现偏差和适当限制客户所需的可能实现之间取得平衡。如果对所需输出的内容进行仔细选择,系统黑盒行为的代数规范就能提供这样的功能。为了实现这一目标,我们提出了一个新概念--规范性。我们将客户问题领域的算子作为代数规范。这种规范通常有多个代数作为语义。我们没有指定一个特定的代数(如初始代数)作为实现,而是保持在客户规范的抽象水平上:输入和输出以代数中的算子组合为单位。我们将每个代数确定哪些指定算子组合等同于其他算子组合作为输入/输出组合必须满足的第一个标准,以确定其是否符合实现条件。然后,我们认为,对于客户机来说,只有某些基本运算符的组合才能作为输出出现。然后,我们研究了一个 "规范性"(canonicity)概念,以明确这一点。因此,我们为客户端规范提供了一种新颖的语法和语义。该语义与客户将实现视为黑盒的观点相匹配。本文的结构如下。我们主要从客户和规范制定者的角度来研究代数规范。在第 2.1 节中,我们将简要介绍代数规范所基于的一阶逻辑。在第 2.2 节中,我们将讨论代数规范并将其形式化。我们将代数规范的语法和语义视为黑箱,与实现语言无关。之后,我们将在第 2.3 节中简要介绍向 OO 实现迈进的步骤。3.第 4 节第 4 节包含对该方法后果和未来工作的一些思考。我们首先讨论所使用的元级符号。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信