<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd">
  <responseDate>2026-07-22T22:18:06Z</responseDate>
  <request identifier="8466" metadataPrefix="oai_dc" verb="GetRecord">https://drops.dagstuhl.de/oai</request>
  <GetRecord>
    <record>
      <header>
        <identifier>oai:drops-oai.dagstuhl.de:8466</identifier>
        <datestamp>2024-03-06T10:30:11Z</datestamp>
        <setSpec>ddc:004</setSpec>
        <setSpec>open_access</setSpec>
      </header>
      <metadata>
        <oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
          <dc:title>On Improving Run-time Checking in Dynamic Languages</dc:title>
          <dc:creator>Stulova, Nataliia</dc:creator>
          <dc:subject>Runtime Verification</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>Assertions</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>Prolog</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>Logic Programming</dc:subject>
          <dc:description>In order to detect incorrect program behaviors, a number of approaches&#13;
have been proposed, which include a combination of language-level&#13;
constructs (procedure-level annotations such as assertions/contracts,&#13;
gradual types, etc.) and associated tools (such as static code analyzers&#13;
and run-time verification frameworks).&#13;
However, it is often the case that these constructs and tools are not&#13;
used to their full extent in practice due to a number of limitations&#13;
such as excessive run-time overhead and/or limited expressiveness.&#13;
The issue is especially prominent in the context of dynamic&#13;
languages without an underlying strong type system, such as Prolog.&#13;
In our work we propose several practical solutions for minimizing the&#13;
run-time overhead associated with assertion-based verification while&#13;
keeping the correctness guarantees provided by run-time checks.&#13;
We present the solutions in the context of the Ciao system, where a&#13;
combination of an abstract interpretation-based static analyzer and&#13;
run-time verification framework is available, although our proposals&#13;
can be straightforwardly adapted to any other similar system.</dc:description>
          <dc:publisher>Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik</dc:publisher>
          <dc:contributor>Nataliia Stulova</dc:contributor>
          <dc:date>2018</dc:date>
          <dc:relation>Is Part Of OASIcs, Volume 58, Technical Communications of the 33rd International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2017)</dc:relation>
          <dc:type>InProceedings</dc:type>
          <dc:type>Text</dc:type>
          <dc:type>doc-type:ResearchArticle</dc:type>
          <dc:type>publishedVersion</dc:type>
          <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
          <dc:identifier>doi:10.4230/OASIcs.ICLP.2017.15</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-84665</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/OASIcs.ICLP.2017.15</dc:identifier>
          <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
          <dc:rights>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode</dc:rights>
        </oai_dc:dc>
      </metadata>
    </record>
  </GetRecord>
</OAI-PMH>
