Abstract

AbstractWhile various specification languages for concurrent-system design exist today, it is often not clear which specification language is more suitable than another for a particular case study. To address this problem, we study four different specification languages for the same 2×2 Switch case study: TLA + , Bluespec, Statecharts, and the Algebra of Communicating Processes (ACP). By slightly altering the design intent of the Switch, we obtain more complicated behaviors of the Switch. For each design intent, we investigate how each specification, in each of the specification languages, captures the corresponding behavior. By using three different criteria, we judge each specification and specification language. For our case study, however, all four specification languages perform poorly in at least two criteria! Hence, this paper illustrates, on a seemingly simple case study, some of the prevailing difficulties of concurrent-system design.Keywordsformal specification languageslocal reasoningadaptabilitynon-functional requirements

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.