Skip to main content

Small Specifications for Tree Update

  • Conference paper
Web Services and Formal Methods (WS-FM 2009)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 6194))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

O’Hearn, Reynolds and Yang introduced Separation Logic to provide modular reasoning about simple, mutable data structures in memory. They were able to construct small specifications of programs, by reasoning about the local parts of memory accessed by programs. Gardner, Calcagno and Zarfaty generalised this work, introducing Context Logic to reason about more complex data structures. In particular, they developed a formal, compositional specification of the Document Object Model, a W3C XML update library. Whilst keeping to the spirit of local reasoning, they were not able to retain small specifications. We introduce Segment Logic, which provides a more fine-grained analysis of the tree structure and yields small specifications. As well as being aesthetically pleasing, small specifications are important for reasoning about concurrent tree update.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Berdine, J., Calcagno, C., O’Hearn, P.W.: Smallfoot: Modular automatic assertion checking with separation logic. In: de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M., Graf, S., de Roever, W.-P. (eds.) FMCO 2005. LNCS, vol. 4111, pp. 115–137. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Calcagno, C., Dinsdale-Young, T., Gardner, P.: Adjunct elimination in context logic for trees. In: Shao, Z. (ed.) APLAS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4807, pp. 255–270. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Calcagno, C., Gardner, P., Zarfaty, U.: Context logic and tree update. In: POPL, vol. 40, ACM, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cardelli, L., Gordon, A.D.: Ambient logic. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science (in press, 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gabbay, M.J., Pitts, A.M.: A new approach to abstract syntax with variable binding. Formal Aspects of Computing 13 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gardner, P., Smith, G., Wheelhouse, M., Zarfaty, U.: Local Hoare reasoning about DOM. In: PODS, vol. 27, ACM, New York (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gardner, P., Wheelhouse, M.: Small specifications for tree update (extended version) (2009), http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~mjw03/PersonalWebpage/pdfs/moveFull.pdf

  8. Gardner, P., Zarfaty, U.: Reasoning about high-level tree update and its low-level implementation. Technical Report DTR09-9, Imperial College (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hosoya, H., Pierce, B.C.: Xduce: A statically typed XML processing language. In: TOIT 2003, vol. 3, ACM, New York (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ishtiaq, S., O’Hearn, P.W.: BI as an assertion language for mutable data structures. In: POPL 2001, vol. 36, ACM, New York (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Milner, R.: Pi-nets: A graphical form of π-calculus. In: Sannella, D. (ed.) ESOP 1994. LNCS, vol. 788, Springer, Heidelberg (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Milner, R., Parrow, J., Walker, D.: A calculus of mobile processes I & II. Information and Computation 100 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  13. O’Hearn, P.W., Reynolds, J., Yang, H.: Local reasoning about programs that alter data structures. In: Fribourg, L. (ed.) CSL 2001 and EACSL 2001. LNCS, vol. 2142, p. 15. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  14. O’Hearn, P.W.: Resources, concurrency and local reasoning. Theoretical Computer Science 375 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Raza, M., Gardner, P.: Footprints in local reasoning. In: Amadio, R.M. (ed.) FOSSACS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4962, pp. 201–215. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Smith, G.: Providing a formal specification for DOM core level 1. PhD Thesis, (to be submitted) (December 2009)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Vafeiadis, V.: Modular fine-grained concurrency verification. Technical Report UCAM-CL-TR-726, Cambridge (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  18. W3C. Dom: Document object model. W3C recommendation (2005), http://www.w3.org/DOM/

  19. Yang, H., O’Hearn, P.W.: A semantic basis for local reasoning. In: Nielsen, M., Engberg, U. (eds.) FOSSACS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2303, p. 402. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Gardner, P., Wheelhouse, M. (2010). Small Specifications for Tree Update. In: Laneve, C., Su, J. (eds) Web Services and Formal Methods. WS-FM 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6194. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14458-5_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14458-5_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-14457-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-14458-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics