Search Results

Documents authored by Drossopoulou, Sophia

Document
Artifact
DOI: 10.4230/DARTS.6.2.19
Implementation of SHAPES Case Studies (Artifact)

Authors: Alexandros Tasos, Juliana Franco, Sophia Drossopoulou, Tobias Wrigstad, and Susan Eisenbach

Published in: DARTS, Volume 6, Issue 2, Special Issue of the 34th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP 2020)

Abstract
Our main paper presents {SHAPES}, a language extension which offers developers fine-grained control over the placement of data in memory, whilst retaining both memory safety and object abstraction via pooling and clustering. As part of the development of {SHAPES}, we wanted to investigate the usefulness of the concepts {SHAPES} brings to the table. To that extent, we implemented five such case studies. This publication provides the corresponding code and instructions on how to run these case studies and derive the results we provide.
Cite as

Alexandros Tasos, Juliana Franco, Sophia Drossopoulou, Tobias Wrigstad, and Susan Eisenbach. Implementation of SHAPES Case Studies (Artifact). In Special Issue of the 34th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP 2020). Dagstuhl Artifacts Series (DARTS), Volume 6, Issue 2, pp. 19:1-19:3, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2020)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@Article{tasos_et_al:DARTS.6.2.19,
  author =	{Tasos, Alexandros and Franco, Juliana and Drossopoulou, Sophia and Wrigstad, Tobias and Eisenbach, Susan},
  title =	{{Implementation of SHAPES Case Studies (Artifact)}},
  pages =	{19:1--19:3},
  journal =	{Dagstuhl Artifacts Series},
  ISSN =	{2509-8195},
  year =	{2020},
  volume =	{6},
  number =	{2},
  editor =	{Tasos, Alexandros and Franco, Juliana and Drossopoulou, Sophia and Wrigstad, Tobias and Eisenbach, Susan},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/DARTS.6.2.19},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-132167},
  doi =		{10.4230/DARTS.6.2.19},
  annote =	{Keywords: Cache utilisation, Data representation, Memory safety}
}
Document
SCICO Journal-first
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.ECOOP.2020.31
Reshape Your Layouts, Not Your Programs: A Safe Language Extension for Better Cache Locality (SCICO Journal-first)

Authors: Alexandros Tasos, Juliana Franco, Sophia Drossopoulou, Tobias Wrigstad, and Susan Eisenbach

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 166, 34th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP 2020)

Abstract
The vast gap between CPU and RAM speed means that on modern architectures, developers need to carefully consider data placement in memory to exploit spatial and temporal cache locality and use CPU caches effectively. To that extent, developers have devised various strategies regarding data placement; for objects that should be close in memory, a contiguous pool of objects is allocated and then new instances are constructed inside it; an array of objects is clustered into multiple arrays, each holding the values of a specific field of the objects. Such data placements, however, have to be performed manually, hence readability, maintainability, memory safety, and key OO concepts such as encapsulation and object identity need to be sacrificed and the business logic needs to be modified accordingly. We propose a language extension, SHAPES, which aims to offer developers high-level fine-grained control over data placement, whilst retaining memory safety and the look-and-feel of OO. SHAPES extends an OO language with the concepts of pools and layouts: Developers declare pools that contain objects of a specific type and specify the pool’s layout. A layout specifies how objects in a pool are laid out in memory. That is, it dictates how the values of the fields of the pool’s objects are grouped together into clusters. Objects stored in pools behave identically to ordinary, standalone objects; the type system allows the code to be oblivious to the layout being used. This means that the business logic is completely decoupled from any placement concerns and the developer need not deviate from the spirit of OO to better utilise the cache. In this paper, we present the features of SHAPES, as well as the design rationale behind each feature. We then showcase the merit of SHAPES through a sequence of case studies; we claim that, compared to the manual pooling and clustering of objects, we can observe improvement in readability and maintainability, and comparable (i.e., on par or better) performance. We also present SHAPES^h, an OO calculus which models the SHAPES ideas, we formalise the type system, and prove soundness. The SHAPES^h type system uses ideas from Ownership Types [Clarke et al., 2013] and Java Generics [Gosling et al., 2014]: In SHAPES^h, pools are part of the types; SHAPES^h class and type definitions are enriched with pool parameters. Moreover, class pool parameters are enriched with bounds, which is what allows the business logic of SHAPES to be oblivious to the layout being used. SHAPES^h types also enforce pool uniformity and homogeneity. A pool is uniform if it contains objects of the same class only; a pool is homogeneous if the corresponding fields of all its objects point to objects in the same pool. These properties allow for more efficient implementation. For performance considerations, we also designed SHAPES^l, an untyped, unsafe low-level language with no explicit support for objects or pools. We argue that it is possible to translate SHAPES^l into existing low-level intermediate representations, such as LLVM [Lattner and Adve, 2004], present the translation of SHAPES^h into SHAPES^l, and show its soundness. Thus, we expect SHAPES to offer developers more fine-grained control over data placement, without sacrificing memory safety or the OO look-and-feel.
Cite as

Alexandros Tasos, Juliana Franco, Sophia Drossopoulou, Tobias Wrigstad, and Susan Eisenbach. Reshape Your Layouts, Not Your Programs: A Safe Language Extension for Better Cache Locality (SCICO Journal-first). In 34th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP 2020). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 166, pp. 31:1-31:3, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2020)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{tasos_et_al:LIPIcs.ECOOP.2020.31,
  author =	{Tasos, Alexandros and Franco, Juliana and Drossopoulou, Sophia and Wrigstad, Tobias and Eisenbach, Susan},
  title =	{{Reshape Your Layouts, Not Your Programs: A Safe Language Extension for Better Cache Locality}},
  booktitle =	{34th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP 2020)},
  pages =	{31:1--31:3},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-154-2},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2020},
  volume =	{166},
  editor =	{Hirschfeld, Robert and Pape, Tobias},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.ECOOP.2020.31},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-131887},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.ECOOP.2020.31},
  annote =	{Keywords: Cache utilisation, Data representation, Memory safety}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/OASIcs.ICCSW.2014.50
Calculating communication costs with Sessions Types and Sizes

Authors: Juliana Franco, Sophia Drossopoulou, and Nobuko Yoshida

Published in: OASIcs, Volume 43, 2014 Imperial College Computing Student Workshop

Abstract
We present a small object-oriented language with communication primitives. The language allows the assignment of binary session types to communication channels in order to govern the interaction between different objects and to statically calculate communication costs. Class declarations are annotated with size information in order to determine the cost of sending and receiving objects. This paper describes our first steps in the creation of a session-based, object-oriented language for communication optimization purposes.
Cite as

Juliana Franco, Sophia Drossopoulou, and Nobuko Yoshida. Calculating communication costs with Sessions Types and Sizes. In 2014 Imperial College Computing Student Workshop. Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs), Volume 43, pp. 50-57, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2014)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{franco_et_al:OASIcs.ICCSW.2014.50,
  author =	{Franco, Juliana and Drossopoulou, Sophia and Yoshida, Nobuko},
  title =	{{Calculating communication costs with Sessions Types and Sizes}},
  booktitle =	{2014 Imperial College Computing Student Workshop},
  pages =	{50--57},
  series =	{Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-939897-76-7},
  ISSN =	{2190-6807},
  year =	{2014},
  volume =	{43},
  editor =	{Neykova, Rumyana and Ng, Nicholas},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/OASIcs.ICCSW.2014.50},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-47739},
  doi =		{10.4230/OASIcs.ICCSW.2014.50},
  annote =	{Keywords: Session types, communication, object-oriented, multicore}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/OASIcs.ICCSW.2013.119
Refactoring Boundary

Authors: Tim Wood and Sophia Drossopoulou

Published in: OASIcs, Volume 35, 2013 Imperial College Computing Student Workshop

Abstract
We argue that the limit of the propagation of the heap effects of a source code modification is determined by the aliasing structure of method parameters in a trace of the method calls that cross a boundary which partitions the heap. Further, that this aliasing structure is sufficient to uniquely determine the state of the part of the heap which has not been affected. And we give a definition of what it means for a part of the heap to be unaffected by a source code modification. This can be used to determine the correctness of a refactoring.
Cite as

Tim Wood and Sophia Drossopoulou. Refactoring Boundary. In 2013 Imperial College Computing Student Workshop. Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs), Volume 35, pp. 119-127, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2013)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{wood_et_al:OASIcs.ICCSW.2013.119,
  author =	{Wood, Tim and Drossopoulou, Sophia},
  title =	{{Refactoring Boundary}},
  booktitle =	{2013 Imperial College Computing Student Workshop},
  pages =	{119--127},
  series =	{Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-939897-63-7},
  ISSN =	{2190-6807},
  year =	{2013},
  volume =	{35},
  editor =	{Jones, Andrew V. and Ng, Nicholas},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/OASIcs.ICCSW.2013.119},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-42809},
  doi =		{10.4230/OASIcs.ICCSW.2013.119},
  annote =	{Keywords: Refactoring, Object Oriented}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/DagSemProc.08061.3
A Unified Framework for Verification Techniques for Object Invariants

Authors: Sophia Drossopoulou, Adrian Francalanza, P. Müller, and Alexander J. Summers

Published in: Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Volume 8061, Types, Logics and Semantics for State (2008)

Abstract
Object invariants define the consistency of objects. They have subtle semantics, mainly because of call-backs, multi-object invariants, and subclassing. Several verification techniques for object invariants have been proposed. It is difficult to compare these techniques, and to ascertain their soundness, because of their differences in restrictions on programs and invariants, in the use of advanced type systems (e.g., ownership types), in the meaning of invariants, and in proof obligations. We develop a unified framework for such techniques. We distil seven parameters that characterise a verification technique, and identify sufficient conditions on these parameters which guarantee soundness. We instantiate our framework with three verification techniques from the literature, and use it to assess soundness and compare expressiveness.
Cite as

Sophia Drossopoulou, Adrian Francalanza, P. Müller, and Alexander J. Summers. A Unified Framework for Verification Techniques for Object Invariants. In Types, Logics and Semantics for State. Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Volume 8061, pp. 1-25, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2008)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{drossopoulou_et_al:DagSemProc.08061.3,
  author =	{Drossopoulou, Sophia and Francalanza, Adrian and M\"{u}ller, P. and Summers, Alexander J.},
  title =	{{A Unified Framework for  Verification Techniques for Object Invariants}},
  booktitle =	{Types, Logics and Semantics for State},
  pages =	{1--25},
  series =	{Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings (DagSemProc)},
  ISSN =	{1862-4405},
  year =	{2008},
  volume =	{8061},
  editor =	{Amal Ahmed and Nick Benton and Martin Hofmann and Greg Morrisett},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/DagSemProc.08061.3},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-14278},
  doi =		{10.4230/DagSemProc.08061.3},
  annote =	{Keywords: Object invariants, visible states semantics, verification, sound}
}
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2024 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Imprint Privacy Contact