Skip to main content

Reuse of concurrent object descriptions

  • Part II Object-Orientation And Concurrent Languages
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 491))

Abstract

A code sharing technique for object-oriented concurrent programming is presented, in which the behavior of an object is defined in terms of primary, constraint, and transition methods. A primary method represents the primary task to be performed in response to an incoming message. A constraint method determines whether or not an arriving message is acceptable. A transition method establishes the next context of an object. These three sorts of methods are inherited separately, i.e., two methods in different sorts do not override each other. By this way of separation, synchronization codes can be effectively shared and reused. We present two application examples to show the effectiveness of our technique.

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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Mehmet Aksit, Jan Willem Dijkstra, and Anand Tripathi. Atomic delegations. Technical Report INF-89-10, Un. of Twente, Department of Computer Science, February 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gul Agha. Actors: A Model of Concurrent Computation in Distributed Systems. The MIT Press, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  3. A. V. Aho, J. Hopcroft, and D. Ullman. The Design and Analysis of Computer Algorithms. Addison-Wesley, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Daniel G. Bobrow, Linda G. DeMichiel, Richard P. Gabriel, Sonya E. Keene, Gregor Kiczales, and David A. Moon. Common lisp object system specification, X3J13 document 88-002R. SIGPLAN Notices, 23, September 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  5. R. Bayer and M. Schkolnick. Concurrency of operations on B-tree. Acta Informatica, 9(1):1–21, 1977.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Scott Danforth and Chris Tomlinson. Type theories and object-oriented programming. ACM Computing Surveys, 20(1):29–72, March 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Adele Goldberg and David Robson. Smalltalk-80 — The Language and its Implementation. Addison-Wesley, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  8. C. A. R. Hoare. Communicating sequential processes. Communications of the ACM, 21(8):666–677, 1978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dennis G. Kafura and Keung Hae Lee. Inheritance in actor based concurrent object-oriented languages. In ECOOP'89: Proceedings of European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, pages 131–145, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Wilf R. LaLonde. Designing families of data types using exemplars. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 11(2):212–248, April 1989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Henry Lieberman. Using prototypical objects to implement shared behavior in object oriented systems. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications, Portland OR, USA., pages 214–223, November 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Robin Milner. A Calculus of Communicating Systems, volume 92 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Satoshi Matsuoka, Ken Wakita, and Akinori Yonezawa. Inheritance in concurrent object-oriented languages. In 7th Conference Proceedings of Japan Society for Software Science and Technology, pages 65–68, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  14. J. H. Reppy. Synchronous operations as first-class values. In Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 250–259. ACM, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Guy L. Steele Jr., editor. Common Lisp — the Language. Digital Press, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lynn Andrea Stein. Delegation is inheritance. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications, Orlando FL, USA., pages 138–155, October 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Symbolics Inc. Symbolics Common Lisp — Language Concepts, Symbolics Release 7.2 Document Set, February 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Chris Tomlinson and Vineet Singh. Inheritance and synchronization with enabled-sets. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications, New Orleans, USA, pages 103–112. ACM, October 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  19. David Ungar and Randall B. Smith. Self: The power of simplicity. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications, Orlando FL, USA., pages 227–242, October 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Akinori Yonezawa, editor. ABCL: An Object-Oriented Concurrent System — Theory, Language, Programming, Implementation and Application. The MIT Press, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Akinori Yonezawa, Etsuya Shibayama, Jean Pierre Briot, Yasuaki Honda, and Toshihiro Takada. An object-oriented concurrent information processing model ABCM/1 and its description language ABCL/1. Computer Software, 3(3):9–23, 1986. (Revised version in [Yon90]).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Akinori Yonezawa Takayasu Ito

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1991 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Shibayama, E. (1991). Reuse of concurrent object descriptions. In: Yonezawa, A., Ito, T. (eds) Concurrency: Theory, Language, and Architecture. CONCURRENCY 1989. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 491. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-53932-8_47

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-53932-8_47

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-53932-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46452-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics