Transactional events (TE) are an approach to concurrent programming that enriches the first-class synchronous message-passing of Concurrent ML (CML) with a combinator that allows multiple messages to be passed as part of one all-or-nothing synchronization. Donnelly and Fluet (2006) designed and implemented TE as a Haskell library and demonstrated that it enables elegant solutions to programming patterns that are awkward or impossible in CML. However, both the definition and the implementation of TE relied fundamentally on the code in a synchronization not using mutable memory, an unreasonable assumption for mostly functional languages like ML where functional interfaces may have impure implementations.We present a definition and implementation of TE that supports ML-style references and nested synchronizations, both of which were previously unnecessary due to Haskell's more restrictive type system. As in prior work, we have a high-level semantics that makes nondeterministic choices such that synchronizations succeed whenever possible and a low-level semantics that uses search to implement the high-level semantics soundly and completely. The key design trade-off in the semantics is to allow updates to mutable memory without requiring the implementation to consider all possible thread interleavings. Our solution uses first-class heaps and allows interleavings only when a message is sent or received. We have used Coq to prove the high-and low-level semantics equivalent.We have implemented our approach by modifying the Objective Caml run-time system. By modifying the run-time system, rather than relying solely on a library, we can eliminate the potential for nonterminating computations within unsuccessful synchronizations to run forever.

Transactional events (TE) are an approach to concurrent programming that enriches the first-class synchronous message-passing of Concurrent ML (CML) with a combinator that allows multiple messages to be passed as part of one all-or-nothing synchronization. Donnelly and Fluet (2006) designed and implemented TE as a Haskell library and demonstrated that it enables elegant solutions to programming patterns that are awkward or impossible in CML. However, both the definition and the implementation of TE relied fundamentally on the code in a synchronization not using mutable memory, an unreasonable assumption for mostly functional languages like ML where functional interfaces may have impure implementations.We present a definition and implementation of TE that supports ML-style references and nested synchronizations, both of which were previously unnecessary due to Haskell's more restrictive type system. As in prior work, we have a high-level semantics that makes nondeterministic choices such that synchronizations succeed whenever possible and a low-level semantics that uses search to implement the high-level semantics soundly and completely. The key design trade-off in the semantics is to allow updates to mutable memory without requiring the implementation to consider all possible thread interleavings. Our solution uses first-class heaps and allows interleavings only when a message is sent or received. We have used Coq to prove the high-and low-level semantics equivalent.We have implemented our approach by modifying the Objective Caml run-time system. By modifying the run-time system, rather than relying solely on a library, we can eliminate the potential for nonterminating computations within unsuccessful synchronizations to run forever.

Transactional events (TE) are an extension of Concurrent ML (CML), a programming model for synchronous message-passing. Prior work has focused on TE's formal semantics and its implementation. This paper considers programming idioms, particularly those that vary unexpectedly from the corresponding CML idioms. First, we solve a subtle problem with client-server protocols in TE. Second, we argue that CML's wrap and guard primitives do not translate well to TE, and we suggest useful workarounds. Finally, we discuss how to rewrite CML protocols that use abort actions

Software architecture research has proposed using protocols for specifying the interactions between components through ports. Enforcing these protocols in an implementation is difficult. This paper proposes an approach to statically reason about protocol conformance of an implementation. It leverages the architectural guarantees of the ArchJava programming language. The approach allows modular reasoning about implementations with callbacks, recursive calls, and multiple instances of component types. It uses a dataflow analysis to check method implementations and a summary-based interprocedural analysis to reason modularly about component composition. The approach is limited to static architectures but can handle multiple instances for component types and arbitrary nesting of components. We tested the implementation on a case study, and the results suggest that the approach can be scaled to large software applications.