Local Hoare reasoning about DOM

Gardner, Philippa; Smith, Gareth; Wheelhouse, Mark; Zarfaty, Uri

doi:10.1145/1376916.1376953

Cited by 34 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lowlevel imperative commands are typically local [12]. In our work on specifying DOM [7] we demonstrated that the DOM commands are also local. Here, we insist on locality.…”

Section: The Tree Fragment (Z 1[x] + Y 2[t]) Updates To (Z 1[x ⊗ 2[t]]mentioning

confidence: 81%

“…It is straightforward to transfer the techniques developed here to Featherweight DOM [7]. For this paper, we have worked with the intuitive understanding of what it means for command axioms to be small.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With Smith and Zarfaty, Gardner and Wheelhouse have applied Context Logic to provide a concise, compositional specification of the W3C Document Object Model (DOM) [17], [7], a library for XML update. In our initial paper [6], we introduced and reasoned about Featherweight DOM (called Minimal DOM in the paper), a fragment of DOM which concentrates on the DOM tree structure rather than the full DOM structure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Small Specifications for Tree Update

Gardner

Wheelhouse

2010

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. O'Hearn, Reynolds and Yang introduced local Hoare reasoning about mutable data structures using Separation Logic. They reason about the local parts of the memory accessed by programs, and thus construct their smallest complete specifications. Gardner et al. generalised their work, using Context Logic to reason about structured data at the same level of abstraction as the data itself. In particular, they developed a formal specification of the Document Object Model, a W3C XML update library. Whilst they kept to the spirit of local reasoning, they were not able to retain small specifications: for example, the specification of appendChild was not small. We show how to obtain small specifications by working with a more fine-grained context structure, allowing us to work with arbitrary tree fragments.

show abstract

“…Lowlevel imperative commands are typically local [12]. In our work on specifying DOM [7] we demonstrated that the DOM commands are also local. Here, we insist on locality.…”

Section: The Tree Fragment (Z 1[x] + Y 2[t]) Updates To (Z 1[x ⊗ 2[t]]mentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Small Specifications for Tree Update

Gardner

Wheelhouse

2010

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…fragment of the W3C DOM (Gardner, Smith, Wheelhouse, and Zarfaty, 2008), and tree segments (Gardner and Wheelhouse, 2009). …”

Section: Notationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Context logic has been used to reason about programs that manipulate data structures, such as sequences, multisets and trees (Calcagno et al, 2007a). In particular, it has been successfully applied to reason about the W3C DOM tree update library (Gardner et al, 2008). Thus far, context logic reasoning has always been justified with respect to an operational semantics defined at the same level of abstraction as the reasoning.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Abstract Local Reasoning for Program Modules

Dinsdale-Young

Gardner

Wheelhouse

2011

Algebra and Coalgebra in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Local reasoning has become a well-established technique in program verification, which has been shown to be useful at many different levels of abstraction. In separation logic, we use a low-level abstraction that is close to how the machine sees the program state. In context logic, we work with high-level abstractions that are close to how the clients of modules see the program state. We apply program refinement to local reasoning, demonstrating that high-level, abstract local reasoning is sound for module implementations. We consider two approaches: one that preserves the high-level locality at the low level; and one that breaks the high-level 'fiction' of locality.

show abstract