1 / 50

500 likes | 604 Vues

RT development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic. Peter Gorm Larsen ( pgl@iha.dk ). Agenda. Development Process for RT systems Abstract Syntax Trees and analysis of ASTs Introduction to Logic. Reactive systems Nature. The World. Environment. System. stimuli. response.

Télécharger la présentation
## RT development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic

**An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation**
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.
Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only.
Download presentation by click this link.
While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

**RT development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Peter Gorm Larsen (pgl@iha.dk) RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Agenda**• Development Process for RT systems • Abstract Syntax Trees and analysis of ASTs • Introduction to Logic RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Reactive systems Nature**The World Environment System stimuli response RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Overview of Development Process**RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**General use case for anembedded system**RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Capturing Requirements in VDM-SL**operations PerformSystemReaction: seq of SensorInput ==> seq of ActuatorCommand PerformSystemReaction(inputseq) == if inputseq = [] then [] else SensorTreatment(hd inputseq) ^ PerformSystemReaction(tl inputseq) An accumulating parameter can be used for feedback RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Sequential Design Model**RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Typical Design Structure**• An Environment class is needed • A SystemName class is needed • A World class is introduced for setting up both the environment and the system • World shall contain a Run operation • World have access to some notion of time • The Environment has operation for creating signals to the system and receiving events from the system • Flow of control resides with the Environment • Each class that do actions has an isFinished operation RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Concurrent Design Model**• Similar to sequential design model but • Identification of threads • Determine necessary communication • Establish synchronization points • Validation of model • Typical design structure • Flow of control is distributed • Synchronization using permission predicates and mutex • isFinished operations become skip with permission predicates • A simple Timer class is replaced with the TimeStamp class RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Concurrent Real-Time and Distributed Design Model**• Timing built in: • Use of default durations • Use of duration and cycles statements • Setting task switching overhead • Typical Design Structure • SystemName is now turned into a system • CPU’s and BUS’es are introduced inside SystemName • Environment may be turned into a system • Some operations are made asynchronous • Some Step like threads are made periodic • Explicit use of TimeStamp is removed RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Agenda**• Development Process for RT systems • Abstract Syntax Trees and analysis of ASTs • Introduction to Logic RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**The “Phases” of a Compiler**Source Program Syntax Analysis Error Reports Abstract Syntax Tree Type Analysis Error Reports Decorated Abstract Syntax Tree Code Generation Object Code RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**VDM-SL AST Example 1**Program :: decls : seq of Declaration stmt : Stmt; Declaration :: id : Identifier tp : Type val : [Value]; Identifier = seq1 ofchar; Type = <BoolType> | <IntType> ; Value = BoolVal | IntVal; BoolVal :: val : bool; IntVal :: val : int; RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**VDM-SL AST Example 2**Stmt = BlockStmt | AssignStmt | CondStmt | ForStmt | RepeatStmt; BlockStmt :: decls : seq of Declaration stmts : seq1 of Stmt; AssignStmt :: lhs : Variable rhs : Expr; Variable :: id : Identifier; CondStmt :: guard : Expr thenst : Stmt elsest : Stmt; ForStmt :: start : AssignStmt stop : Expr stmt : Stmt; RepeatStmt :: repeat : Stmt until : Expr; RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**VDM-SL AST Example 3**Expr = BinaryExpr | Value | Variable; BinaryExpr :: lhs : Expr op : Operator rhs : Expr; Operator = <Add> | <Sub> | <Div> | <Mul> | <Lt> | <Gt> | <Eq> | <And> | <Or>; RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Semantic Analysis of ASTs**• Environments that denote context • StatEnv = map AST`Identifier to AST`Type; • DynEnv = map AST`Identifier to AST`Value; • CGEnv = map AST`Identifier to AST`Type; • Recursive top-down handling of analysis • Possibly use a visitor pattern in an OO context RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Evaluation of An Expression**EvalExpr : AST‘Expr * DynEnv -> AST‘Value EvalExpr(ex, denv) == cases ex : mk_AST‘BoolVal(-), mk_AST‘IntVal(-) -> ex, mk_AST‘Variable(id) -> denv(id), mk_AST‘BinaryExpr(-,-,-) -> EvalBinaryExpr(ex, denv) end pre is_AST‘BinaryExpr(ex) => pre_EvalBinaryExpr(ex, denv); EvalBinaryExpr : AST‘BinaryExpr * DynEnv -> AST‘Value EvalBinaryExpr(mk_AST‘BinaryExpr(lhs, op, rhs), denv) == let v1 = EvalExpr(lhs, denv).val, v2 = EvalExpr(rhs, denv).val in cases op : <Add> -> mk_AST‘IntVal(v1 + v2), ... end RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Type Checking An Expression**wf_Expr : AST‘Expr * StatEnv -> bool * [AST‘Type] wf_Expr(ex, senv) == cases true : (is_AST‘BoolVal(ex)) -> mk (true, <BoolType>), (is_AST‘IntVal(ex)) -> mk_(true, <IntType>), (is_AST‘Variable(ex)) -> wf Variable(ex, senv), (is_AST‘BinaryExpr(ex)) -> wf_BinaryExpr(ex, senv), others -> mk_(false, <IntType>) end; wf_BinaryExpr : AST‘BinaryExpr * StatEnv -> bool * [AST‘Type] wf_BinaryExpr(mk_AST‘BinaryExpr(lhs, op, rhs), senv) == let mk_(wf_lhs, tp_lhs) = wf_Expr(lhs, senv), mk_(wf_rhs, tp_rhs) = wf_Expr(rhs, senv) in cases op : <Add>, <Sub>, <Div>, <Mul> -> mk_(wf_lhs and wf_rhs and tp_lhs = <IntType> and tp_rhs = <IntType>, <IntType>), ... RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**ASTGEN**The ASTGen Tool JAVA interfaces JAVA implementation Simple AST spec (restricted VDM++) VDM++ Interface classes VDM++ Implementation classes RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Binary Expression in AST file**Expression = BinaryExpression | ... BinaryExpression :: lhs : Expression op : BinaryOperator rhs : Expression; Then ASTGen will produce: SimpleExpression.vdmpp SimpleBinaryExpression.vdmpp SimpleBinaryExpressionImpl.vdmpp RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Generated VDM++ Interface Class**class SimpleBinaryExpression is subclass of SimpleExpression operations public getLhs: () ==> SimpleExpression getLhs() == is subclass responsibility; public getOp: () ==> SimpleBinaryOperator getOp() == is subclass responsibility; public getRhs: () ==> SimpleExpression getRhs() == is subclass responsibility; end SimpleBinaryExpression RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Generated VDM++ ImplementationClass**class SimpleBinaryExpressionImpl is subclass of SimpleBinaryExpression instance variables private iv_lhs:SimpleExpression; private iv_op:SimpleBinaryOperator; private iv_rhs:SimpleExpression; operations public SimpleBinaryExpressionImpl: SimpleExpression * SimpleBinaryOperator * SimpleExpression ==> SimpleBinaryExpressionImpl SimpleBinaryExpressionImpl(p_lhs, p_op, p_rhs) == ( iv_lhs := p_lhs; iv_op := p_op; iv_rhs := p_rhs; ); public getLhs: () ==> SimpleExpression getLhs() == return iv_lhs; public getOp: () ==> SimpleBinaryOperator getOp() == return iv_op; public getRhs: () ==> SimpleExpression getRhs() == return iv_rhs; end SimpleBinaryExpressionImpl RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Code Generator Structure**Simple AST Programming language AST (developed using ASTGen) VDM model to be developed Potential backend Simple parser Programming language concrete syntax Simple concrete syntax RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Agenda**• Development Process for RT systems • Abstract Syntax Trees and analysis of ASTs • Introduction to Logic RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Logic**Our ability to state invariants, record pre-conditions and post-conditions, and the ability to reason about a formal model depend on the logic on which the modelling language is based. • Classical logical propositions and predicates • Connectives • Quantifiers RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**25**10 5 5 10 A temperature monitor example Temperature (C) 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Time (s) The monitor records the last five temperature readings RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**A temperature monitor example**The following conditions are to be detected by the monitor: • Rising: the last reading in the sample is greater than the first • Over limit: there is a reading in the sample in excess of 400 C • Continually over limit: all the readings in the sample exceed 400 C • Safe: If readings do not exceed 400 C by the middle of the sample, the reactor is safe. If readings exceed 400 C by the middle of the sample, the reactor is still safe provided that the reading at the end of the sample is less than 400 C. • Alarm: The alarm is to be raised if and only if the reactor is not safe RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Predicates and Propositions**Predicates are simply logical expressions. The simplest kind of logical predicate is a proposition. A proposition is a logical assertion about a particular value or values, usually involving a Boolean operator to compare the values, e.g. 3 < 27 5 = 9 RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Predicates**A predicate is a logical expression that is not specific to particular values but contains variables which can stand for one of a range of possible values, e.g. x < 27 (x**2) + x - 6 = 0 The truth or falsehood of a predicate depends on the value taken by the variables. RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Predicatesin the monitor example**Monitor :: temps : seq of int alarm : bool inv m == len m.temps = 5 Consider a monitorm.mis a sequence so we can index into it: First reading inm: Last reading inm: Predicate stating that the first reading in m is strictly less than the last reading: The truth of the predicate depends on the value ofm. m.temps(1) m.temps(5) m.temps(1) < m.temps(5) RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**The rising condition**The last reading in the sample is greater than the first Monitor :: temps : seq of int alarm : bool inv m == len m.temps = 5 We can express the rising condition as a Boolean function: Rising: Monitor -> bool Rising(m) == m.temps(1) < m.temps(5) For any monitor m, the expression Rising(m) evaluates to true iff the last reading in the sample in m is higher than the first, e.g. Rising( mk_Monitor([233,45,677,650,900], false)) Rising( mk_Monitor([23,45,67,50,20], false)) RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Logical Operators (Connectives)**We will examine the following logical operators: • Negation (NOT) • Conjunction (AND) • Disjunction (OR) • Implication (if – then) • Biconditional (if and only if) Truth tables can be used to show how these operators can combine propositions to compound propositions. RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Negation (not)**Negation allows us to state that the opposite of some logical expression is true, e.g. The temperature in the monitor mon is not rising: not Rising(mon) Truth table for negation: RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Disjunction (or)**Disjunction allows us to express alternatives that are not necessarily exclusive: Over limit: There is a reading in the sample in excess of 400 C OverLimit: Monitor -> bool OverLimit(m) == m.temps(1) > 400 or m.temps(2) > 400 or m.temps(3) > 400 or m.temps(4) > 400 or m.temps(5) > 400 RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Conjunction (and)**Conjunction allows us to express the fact that all of a collection of facts are true. Continually over limit: all the readings in the sample exceed 400 C COverLimit: Monitor -> bool COverLimit(m) == m.temps(1) > 400 and m.temps(2) > 400 and m.temps(3) > 400 and m.temps(4) > 400 and m.temps(5) > 400 RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Implication**Implication allows us to express facts which are only true under certain conditions (“if … then …”): Safe: If readings do not exceed 400 C by the middle of the sample, the reactor is safe. If readings exceed 400 C by the middle of the sample, the reactor is still safe provided that the reading at the end of the sample is less than 400 C. Safe: Monitor -> bool Safe(m) == m.temps(3) > 400 => m.temps(5) < 400 RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Biimplication**Biimplication allows us to express equivalence (“if and only if”). Alarm: The alarm is to be raised if and only if the reactor is not safe This can be recorded as an invariant property: Monitor :: temps : seq of int alarm : bool inv m == len m.temps = 5 and not Safe(m.temps) <=> m.alarm RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Operator Precedence and Associativity**• not has the highest precedence • Followed by and, or, => and <=> in that order • => has right grouping i.e. • A => B => C without brackets means • A => (B => C) • The other logical operators are associative so right and left grouping are equivalent, i.e. • A and (B and C) is identical to (A and B) and C RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Quantifiers**For large collections of values, using a variable makes more sense than dealing with each case separately. inds m.tempsrepresents indices (1-5) of the sample The “over limit” condition can then be expressed more economically as: exists i in setinds m.temps & m.temps(i) > 400 The “continually over limit” condition can then be expressed using “forall”: COverLimit: Monitor -> bool COverLimit(m) == forall i in set inds m.temps & m.temps(i) > 400 RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Quantifiers**Syntax: forallbinding&predicate existsbinding&predicate There are two types of binding: Type Binding, e.g. x : nat n : seq of char Set Binding, e.g. i in set inds m x in set {1,…,20} A type binding lets the bound variable range over a type (a possibly infinite collection of values). A set binding lets the bound variable range over a finite set of values. RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Questions**Formulate the following statements using predicate logic: • Everybody likes Danish pastry • Everybody either likes Danish pastry or is a vegetarian • Either everybody likes Danish pastry or everybody is a vegetarian Are the last two statements equivalent? RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Questions**Formulate the following statements using predicate logic: • Somebody likes Danish pastry • There is somebody who either likes Danish pastry or is a vegetarian • Either somebody likes Danish pastry or somebody is a vegetarian Are the last two statements equivalent? RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Quantifiers**Several variables may be bound at once by a single quantifier, e.g. forall x,y in set {1,…,5} & X <> y => not m.temps(x) = m.temps(y) Would this predicate be true for the following value ofm.temps? [320, 220, 105, 119, 150] RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Formulation Questions**All the readings in the sample are less than 400 and greater than 50. Each reading in the sample is up to 10 greater than its predecessor. There are two distinct readings in the sample which are over 400. forall i in set inds m.temps & m.temps(i) < 400 and m.temps(i) > 50 forall i in set inds m.temps\{1} & m.temps(i – 1) + 10 <= m.temps(i) exists i,j in set inds m.temps & i <> j and m.temps(i) > 400 and m.temps(j) > 400 RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Combination of quantifiers**• Assume we have a predicate with two free variables P(x,y) where x : X and y : Y • Then quantifiers can be combined: • forall y : Y & exists x : X & P(x,y) or • exists y : Y & forallx : X & P(x,y) • Would these be equal if X, Y are int and P = x >y? • However if the same quantifier was used both places the expressions would be equivalent: • forall y : Y & forallx : X & P(x,y) forall x : X & forally : Y & P(x,y) • exists y : Y & existsx : X & P(x,y) exists x : X & existsy : Y & P(x,y) RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Quantifiers**Suppose we have to formalise the following property: There is a “single minimum” in the sequence of readings, i.e. there is a reading which is strictly smaller than any of the other readings. exists i in set inds m.temps & forall j in set inds m.temps & i <> j => m.temps(i) < m.temps(j) Suppose the order of the quantifiers is reversed. RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Questions**• Translate the following into English: • forallx:Elephant & grey(x) • forallx:ANIMAL & elephant(x) => grey(x) • existsx : ANIMAL & bird(x) and has_wings(x) and not flies(x) • Represent the following using predicate logic formulae: • “Joanne is a teacher, she teaches AI, and likes chocolate.” • “Some teachers do not like chocolate” RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Questions**• What is the truth value for the following expressions? • forall x in set {2,4,6} & IsEven(x) • forall xxx in set {} & xxx = 8 • exists b in set {} & b > 0 • exists1 x in set {1,2,6,42} & not IsEven(x) • forall x : nat & x < 5 => x ** 2 > 4 • exists x : nat & x < 5 => x ** 2 > 4 • forall y : nat & y < 5 => y < 20 • forall y in set power {1,2} & card y = 2 • not forall w : nat & z < 4 => exists x : nat & z < x ** 2 RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Summary**• What have I presented today? • Development Process for RT systems • Abstract syntax trees and analysis of ASTs • Introduction to Logic • What do you need to do now? • Read chapter 4 and 5 of the book for next week • Read existing material about the selected project • Formulate a new requirements definition for the project • Start modelling your project in VDM++ using Overture • Present about this project for the rest of us RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic**Quote of the day**The successful construction of all machinery depends on the perfection of the tools employed, and whoever is the master in the art of tool-making possesses the key to the construction of all machines. Charles Babbage, 1851 RT Development process, Abstract Syntax Trees and Logic

More Related