DOCSLIB.ORG

A Large Object-Oriented Virtual Memory: Grouping Strategies, Measurements, and Performance

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Large Object-Oriented Virtual Memory: Grouping Strategies, Measurements, and Performance A Large Object-Oriented Virtual Memory: Grouping Strategies, Measurements, and Performance James William Stamos A Large Object-Oriented Virtual Memory: Grouping Strategies, Measu rements, and Pe rfo rmance by James William Stamos SCG-82-2 May 1982 Corporate Accession P82-00053 © Copyright James William Stamos 1982. All Rights Reserved. Abstract: See page 2. This report is a slightly revised version of a thesis submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at MIT in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degrees of Bachelor of Science and Master of Science. CR Categories: 4.35, 4.6, 6.34. Key words and phrases: virtual memory, paging, object-oriented system, program restructuring, initial placement, static grouping, measurement, reference behavior, Smalltalk. XEROX PALO ALTO RESEARCH CENTERS 3333 Coyote Hill Road / Palo Alto / California 94304 2 Abstract The Smalltalk-80 system is an object-oriented programming environment for which a novel virtual memory is being constructed. This Large Object-Oriented Memory (LOOM) maintains two distinct address spaces and compresses pointers when an object is swapped from disk to core. Although objects are the logical unit of transfer between disk and core, LOOM swaps disk pages between the disk and the in-core disk buffer. The grouping of objects on disk pages can be a critical factor in the determination of speed of Smalltalk application programs. An examination of the reference behavior of Smalltalk-80 provides useful insights for designing grouping strategies and explaining virtual memory performance. After reviewing the experimental methodology and the Large Object-Oriented Memory, this thesis describes nine static grouping techniques and a reference stream compression algorithm. Performance measurements taken from simulations of LOOM and a conventional page-swapping virtual memory are discussed and compared. The effects on the page fault rate of modifying parameters and policies of LOOM are described and an evaluation of LOOM-like virtual memories is offered. In terms of the number of page faults, an object-oriented virtual memory generally outperforms a page-swapping virtual memory for a range of small memory sizes that depends on the particular grouping strategy. The existence and stability of good groupings also impact the choice of a virtual memory design. 3 Acknowledgments This thesis came into reality only with the guidance. support, and encouragement of numerous friends. I must thank the XEROX Palo Alto Research Centers (PARe) for their extraordinary facilities. [am deeply indebted to the entire Software Concepts Group at PARCo for both their technical assistance and their pleasant working environment. Special thanks go to Peter Deutsch and Dan Ingalls for asking probing questions. making invaluable suggestions. and suffering through the first draft of this thesis. My faculty supervisor, David Reed. provided key insights and helped me transform a jumble of ideas into a coherent whole. Finally, I must thank my friend and supervisor at PARCo Ted Kaehler. for his continued support. assistance. and guidance throughout this endeavor. 4 Table of Contents Abstract ................................................................. 2 Acknowledgments .......................................................... 3 Table of Contcnl<; ......................................................... _ .. 4 Ijst of f;'igurcs ............................................................. 6 I. Preliminaries .......................................................... 7 1.1 [n troduction . ................... 7 1.2 Background ................................................... 8 1.3 Novel Extensions .............................................. 9 1.4 Some Resull'i ..... : ........................................... 9 1.5 A H.. oad Map . 11 II. Swapping Strategies and Grouping ......................................... 12 2.1 Logical versus Physical Swapping .................................. 12 2.2 Effectiveness of Grouping ....................................... 12 2.3· A Hierarchy of Groupings ...................................... 13 2.4 LOOM .................................................... 15 2.4.1 Object Swapping ......................................... 15 2.4.2 Pointer Compression ...................................... 17 2.4.3 Storage Management ...................................... 20 2.4.4 Relevant Smalltalk Tenninology .............................. 20 IlL Virtual Machine Emulation .............................................. 23 3.1 Empirical Data versus Mathematical Models .......................... 23 3.2 Emulation of Smalltalk-80 ....................................... 24 3.3 Execution Trace Validity ........................................ 24 [V. Detailed Reference Behavior ............................................. 26 4.1 Definitions .................................................. 26 4.2 'rrace Data .................................................. 27 4.3 Object Size ................................................. 28 4.4 Fractional Utilization .......................................... 30 4.4.1 Discussion ............................................. 31 4.4.2 Incremental Analysis ...................................... 34 4.4.3 Effect of Object Size ...................................... 36 4.4.4 Conclusions ............................................ 38 4.5 Interreference Headway ........................................ 39 4.6 Instance to Class Compression .................................... 42 4.7 Access Frequency ............................................. 45 4.7.1 Discussion ............................................. 45 4.7.2 Effect of Object Size ...................................... 47 4.7.3 Implications for Caches .................................... 49 4.8 Reference Counts ............................................. 49 4.9 Selectors as a Percentage of Literals ................................ 51 4.10 Summary and Conclusions ...................................... 53 V. Static Grouping Algorithms .............................................. 55 5.1 Nine Algorithms .............................................. 55 5.2 Static Pointer Distance ......................................... 57 5.3 Neighbor Relation ............................................ 60 5.3.1 Effect of a Continuous Displacement .......................... 60 5.3.2 Discussion ............................................. 61 5.3.3 Effect of Page Size ....................................... 62 5.4 Conclusions and Predictions ..................................... 64 V L Reference String Compression ............................................ 66 6.1 Developing the Algorithm ....................................... 66 6.1.1 A Simple Compression Scheme ............................... 66 6.1.2 A More Detailed Algorithm ................................. 68 6.1.3 Loom Requirements ...................................... 69 6.1.4 Equivalence ............................................ 70 5 6.2 Three Execution Sequences ...................................... 70 6.3 Reference Spread ........... 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •••••••• 0 •••••••••••••• 71 VIl. Grouping and a Paged Virtual Memory ............. 0 ••••••••••••••••••••••• 74 7.1 Simulating a Paged Virtual Memory ................................ 74 7.2 Results .................................................... 74 7.3 Analysis of Predictions .......... 0 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 77 VIIL Grouping and LOOM ..................... 0 ••••• 0 •••••••••••••••••••••• 79 8.1 Simulating LOOM .......... 0 •• 0 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 79 8.2 Differences l1etween the Simulation and r,OOM ....................... 81 8.3 Result~ ............................ 0 ••••••••••••••••••••••• 81 8.3.1 Results Independent of Grouping ... 0 ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 82 8.3.2 Paging Performance ........ 0 ••• 0 •••••••••••••••• 0 ••••••••• 83 8.3.3 Page Utilization and Cleanliness. 0 ••• 0 •••••••••••• 0 ••••••••••• 85 8.3.4 Effect of Core Purging Policy. 0 •••• 0 ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 87 8.3.5 Variable Buffer Size ................ 0 ••••••••••• 0 •••••••••• 90 8.3.6 Effect of Disk Buffer Purging Policy. 0 ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 94 8.3.7 In-Core Residence Times .... 0 •••••••••••••••••••• 0 ••••••••• 94 8.4 Analysis of Predictions .... 0 •••• 0 0 • 0 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 98 IX. LOOM versus a Paged Virtual Memory ...... 0 ••• 0 ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 100 9.1 Equivalence and the Compression Algorithm. 0 • 0 •••••••••••••••••••• 101 9.2 A Naive Comparison ........... 0 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 103 9.3 LeafiNo-Leaf Comparisons ............................ 0 •••••••• 106 9.4 Warm-Start Comparisons ....................................... 109 9.5 A Note Concerning Page Faults ................... 0 • : ••••••• 0 •••• 112 9.6 Extending These Results .... 0 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ll2 9.7 An Evaluation of LOOM ....... 0 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ll5 X. Dynamic Characteristics and Degradation of Initial Placements ........... 0 •••••••• 118 10.1 Introduction ... 0 ••••••• 0 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 118 10.2 Stack-like Allocation and Deallocation 0 •••••••••••••••••• 0 ••••••••• 119 10.3 Object Lifetime ... 0 •••••••• 0 • 0 0 •••• 0 •••••••••••••• 0 ••••••••• 120 10.4 Dynamic Pointer Distance ............ 0 ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 120 10.5 Degradation of an Initial Placement ..... 0 ••• 0 ••••••••••••••••••••• 122 XI. Conclusions ....................... 0 •••• 0 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ref.Pdf 7.02KB 2020-09-13 23:03:26
    Introduction to Smalltalk - References Ó Ivan Tomek 9/18/00 References Books Kent Beck: Smalltalk: Best Practice Patterns, Prentice-Hall, 1997. Timothy Budd: A Little Smalltalk, Addison-Wesley, 1987. Erich Gamma, Richard Helm, Ralph Johnson, John Vlassides: Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software, Addison-Wesley, 1995. Adele Goldberg: Smalltalk-80: The Interactive Programming Environment, Addison-Wesley, 1983. Adele Goldberg, David Robson: Smalltalk-80: The Language and its Implementation, Addison-Wesley, 1985. Adele Goldberg, David Robson: Smalltalk-80, The Language, Addison-Wesley, 1989. Trevor Hopkins, Bernard Horan: Smalltalk: An Introduction to Application Development Using VisualWorks, Prentice-Hall, 1995. Tim Howard: The Smalltalk Developer’s Guide to Visual Works, SIGS Books, 1995. Ted Kaehler, Dave Patterson: A Taste of Smalltalk, Norton, 1986. Wilf Lalonde: Discovering Smalltalk, Addison-Wesley, 1994. Wilf Lalonde, John R. Pugh: Inside Smalltalk, Volume I, II, Prentice-Hall, 1991. Wilf Lalonde, John R. Pugh: Smalltalk/V, Practice and Experience, Prentice-Hall, 1994. Simon Lewis: The Art and Science of Smalltalk, Prentice-Hall, 1995. Chamond Liu: Smalltalk, Objects, and Design, Prentice-Hall, 1996. Mark Lorenz: Rapid Software Development with Smalltalk, SIGS Books, 1995. Lewis J. Pinson: An Introduction to Object-Oriented Programming and Smalltalk, Addison-Wesley, 1988. Jonathan Pletzke: Advanced Smalltalk, Wiley, 1997. Wolfgang Pree: Design Patterns for Object-Oriented Software Development, Addison-Wesley, 1994. Timothy Ryan: Distributed Object Technology, Concepts and Applications, Prentice-Hall, 1996. Dusko Savic: Object-Oriented Programming with Smalltalk, Prentice-Hall, 1990. Susan Skublics, Edward J. Klimas, David A. Thomas: Smalltalk with Style, Prentice-Hall, 1996. Dan Shafer, Dean A. Ritz: Practical Smalltalk, Springer-Verlag, 1991.
    [Show full text]
  • A Metacircular Architecture for Runtime Optimisation Persistence Clément Béra
    Sista: a Metacircular Architecture for Runtime Optimisation Persistence Clément Béra To cite this version: Clément Béra. Sista: a Metacircular Architecture for Runtime Optimisation Persistence. Program- ming Languages [cs.PL]. Université de Lille 1, 2017. English. tel-01634137 HAL Id: tel-01634137 https://hal.inria.fr/tel-01634137 Submitted on 13 Nov 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Universit´edes Sciences et Technologies de Lille { Lille 1 D´epartement de formation doctorale en informatique Ecole´ doctorale SPI Lille UFR IEEA Sista: a Metacircular Architecture for Runtime Optimisation Persistence THESE` pr´esent´eeet soutenue publiquement le 15 Septembre 2017 pour l'obtention du Doctorat de l'Universit´edes Sciences et Technologies de Lille (sp´ecialit´einformatique) par Cl´ement B´era Composition du jury Pr´esident: Theo D'Hondt Rapporteur : Ga¨elThomas, Laurence Tratt Examinateur : Elisa Gonzalez Boix Directeur de th`ese: St´ephaneDucasse Co-Encadreur de th`ese: Marcus Denker Laboratoire d'Informatique Fondamentale de Lille | UMR USTL/CNRS 8022 INRIA Lille - Nord Europe Numero´ d’ordre: XXXXX i Acknowledgments I would like to thank my thesis supervisors Stéphane Ducasse and Marcus Denker for allowing me to do a Ph.D at the RMoD group, as well as helping and supporting me during the three years of my Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future: the Story of Squeak, a Practical Smalltalk Written in Itself
    Back to the future: the story of Squeak, a practical Smalltalk written in itself Dan Ingalls, Ted Kaehler, John Maloney, Scott Wallace, and Alan Kay [Also published in OOPSLA ’97: Proc. of the 12th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-oriented Programming, 1997, pp. 318-326.] VPRI Technical Report TR-1997-001 Viewpoints Research Institute, 1209 Grand Central Avenue, Glendale, CA 91201 t: (818) 332-3001 f: (818) 244-9761 Back to the Future The Story of Squeak, A Practical Smalltalk Written in Itself by Dan Ingalls Ted Kaehler John Maloney Scott Wallace Alan Kay at Apple Computer while doing this work, now at Walt Disney Imagineering 1401 Flower Street P.O. Box 25020 Glendale, CA 91221 [email protected] Abstract Squeak is an open, highly-portable Smalltalk implementation whose virtual machine is written entirely in Smalltalk, making it easy to debug, analyze, and change. To achieve practical performance, a translator produces an equivalent C program whose performance is comparable to commercial Smalltalks. Other noteworthy aspects of Squeak include: a compact object format that typically requires only a single word of overhead per object; a simple yet efficient incremental garbage collector for 32-bit direct pointers; efficient bulk- mutation of objects; extensions of BitBlt to handle color of any depth and anti-aliased image rotation and scaling; and real-time sound and music synthesis written entirely in Smalltalk. Overview Squeak is a modern implementation of Smalltalk-80 that is available for free via the Internet, at http://www.research.apple.com/research/proj/learning_concepts/squeak/ and other sites. It includes platform-independent support for color, sound, and image processing.
    [Show full text]
  • April 22 -- STEPS NSF 2012 Report
    ! 2012 REPORT ! STEPS Toward Expressive Programming Systems ! “A#Science#Experiment”# ! by# (In#random#order)#Yoshiki#Ohshima,#Dan#Amelang,#Ted#Kaehler,#Bert#Freudenberg,# Aran#Lunzer,#Alan#Kay,#Ian#Piumarta,#Takashi#Yamamiya,#Alan#Borning,#Hesam# Samimi,#Bret#Victor,#Kim#Rose*# VIEWPOINTS#RESEARCH#INSTITUTE# # # *These#are#the#STEPS#researchers#for#the#year#2012.#For#a#complete#listing# of#the#participants#over#the#length#of#the#project#see#the#section#on#the# NSF#site#which#contains#this#report.# TABLE OF CONTENTS — The STEPS Project for the General Public Summary of the STEPS project . Origin . STEPS aims at personal computing . What does STEPS look like? . STEPS is a “science project” . General approach . “T-shirt programming” . Overall map of STEPS . General STEPS results . Making “runnable maths” . Assessing STEPS Summary of STEPS research in 2012 . Inventing & building a language for STEPS “UI and applications”, and rewriting Frank in it . Producing a workable “chain of meaning” that extends from the screen all the way to the CPU . Inventing methods that create automatic visualizers for languages created from metalanguages . Continuing the start of “What vs How” programming via “Cooperating Languages and Solvers” Reflections on the STEPS Project to Date References Outreach Activities for final year of NSF part of the STEPS project Publications for the NSF part of the STEPS project Appendix I: KScript and KSWorld Appendix II: Making Applications in KSWorld ——— ! The$STEPS$Project$For$The$General$Public$ If#computing#is#important—for#daily#life,#learning,#business,#national#defense,#jobs,#and#
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of Smalltalk Topic Paper #7
    The Development of Smalltalk Topic Paper #7 Alex Laird Max Earn Peer CS-3210-01 Reviewer On Time/Format 1 2/4/09 Survey of Programming Languages Correct 5 Spring 2009 Clear 2 Computer Science, (319) 360-8771 Concise 2 [email protected] Grading Rubric Grading Total 10 pts ABSTRACT Dynamically typed languages are easier on the compiler because This paper describes the development of the Smalltalk it has to make fewer passes and the brunt of checking is done on programming language. the syntax of the code. Compilation of Smalltalk is just-in-time compilation, also known Keywords as dynamic translation. It means that upon compilation, Smalltalk code is translated into byte code that is interpreted upon usage and Development, Smalltalk, Programming, Language at that point the interpreter converts the code to machine language and the code is executed. Dynamic translations work very well 1. INTRODUCTION with dynamic typing. Smalltalk, yet another programming language originally developed for educational purposes and now having a much 5. IMPLEMENTATIONS broader horizon, first appeared publically in the computing Smalltalk has been implemented in numerous ways and has been industry in 1980 as a dynamically-typed object-oriented language the influence of many future languages such as Java, Python, based largely on message-passing in Simula and Lisp. Object-C, and Ruby, just to name a few. Athena is a Smalltalk scripting engine for Java. Little Smalltalk 2. EARLY HISTORY was the first interpreter of the programming language to be used Development for Smalltalk started in 1969, but the language outside of the Xerox PARC.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cedar Programming Environment: a Midterm Report and Examination
    The Cedar Programming Environment: A Midterm Report and Examination Warren Teitelman The Cedar Programming Environment: A Midterm Report and Examination Warren Teitelman t CSL-83-11 June 1984 [P83-00012] © Copyright 1984 Xerox Corporation. All rights reserved. CR Categories and Subject Descriptors: D.2_6 [Software Engineering]: Programming environments. Additional Keywords and Phrases: integrated programming environment, experimental programming, display oriented user interface, strongly typed programming language environment, personal computing. t The author's present address is: Sun Microsystems, Inc., 2550 Garcia Avenue, Mountain View, Ca. 94043. The work described here was performed while employed by Xerox Corporation. XEROX Xerox Corporation Palo Alto Research Center 3333 Coyote Hill Road Palo Alto, California 94304 1 Abstract: This collection of papers comprises a report on Cedar, a state-of-the-art programming system. Cedar combines in a single integrated environment: high-quality graphics, a sophisticated editor and document preparation facility, and a variety of tools for the programmer to use in the construction and debugging of his programs. The Cedar Programming Language is a strongly-typed, compiler-oriented language of the Pascal family. What is especially interesting about the Ce~ar project is that it is one of the few examples where an interactive, experimental programming environment has been built for this kind of language. In the past, such environments have been confined to dynamically typed languages like Lisp and Smalltalk. The first paper, "The Roots of Cedar," describes the conditions in 1978 in the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center's Computer Science Laboratory that led us to embark on the Cedar project and helped to define its objectives and goals.
    [Show full text]
  • MVC Revival on the Web
    MVC Revival on the Web Janko Mivšek [email protected] @mivsek @aidaweb ESUG 2013 Motivation 30 years of Smalltalk, 30 years of MVC 34 years exa!tly, sin!e "#$# %ot in JavaScri&t MVC frameworks 'or Sin(le)*age and +ealtime web a&&s ,e Smalltalkers s-ould respe!t and revive our &earls better Contents MVC e &lained %istory /sa(e in !.rrent JavaScri&t frameworks /sa(e in Smalltalk C.rrent and f.t.re MVC in 0ida/Web MVC Explained events Ar!hite!tural desi(n &attern - Model for domain s&e!ifi! data and logi! View updates Controller ) View for &resentation to t-e .ser ) Controller for intera!tions wit- t-e .ser UI and .&datin( domain model Domain changes Main benefit: actions observing ) se&aration of !on!erns Model MVC based on Observer pattern subscribe ) 3bserver looks at observee Observer changed - 3bservee is not aware of t-at s u 4e&enden!y me!-anism2 B t n - 3bserver is de&endent on 3bservee state e observing v - 3bservee m.st re&ort state !-an(es to 3bserver E b - *.b/S.b Event 6.s de!ou&les 3bservee from u S / 3bserver to &reserve its .nawarnes of observation b u changed P Observee Main benefit: (Observable) ) se&aration of !on!erns Multiple observers subscribe - M.lti&le observers of t-e same 3bservee Observer changed - 7n MVC an 3bservee is View and 3bservee is domain Model, t-erefore2 s u B t - many views of t-e same model n e observing v - many a&&s E b - many .sers u S / - mix of all t-ree !ases b u Observee changed P (Observable) Example: Counter demo in Aida/Web M.lti.ser realtime web !ounter exam&le -ttp://demo.aidaweb.si – !li!k Realtime on t-e left – !li!k De!rease or In!rease to c-an(e counter – !ounter is c-an(ed on all ot-er8s browsers History of MVC (1) 7nvented by 9rygve +eenska.g w-en -e worked in "#$:1$# wit- Alan ;ay's group on <ero *arc on Smalltalk and Dynabook – 'inal term Model)View)Controller !oined 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamic Object-Oriented Programming with Smalltalk
    Dynamic Object-Oriented Programming with Smalltalk 1. Introduction Prof. O. Nierstrasz Autumn Semester 2009 LECTURE TITLE What is surprising about Smalltalk > Everything is an object > Everything happens by sending messages > All the source code is there all the time > You can't lose code > You can change everything > You can change things without restarting the system > The Debugger is your Friend © Oscar Nierstrasz 2 ST — Introduction Why Smalltalk? > Pure object-oriented language and environment — “Everything is an object” > Origin of many innovations in OO development — RDD, IDE, MVC, XUnit … > Improves on many of its successors — Fully interactive and dynamic © Oscar Nierstrasz 1.3 ST — Introduction What is Smalltalk? > Pure OO language — Single inheritance — Dynamically typed > Language and environment — Guiding principle: “Everything is an Object” — Class browser, debugger, inspector, … — Mature class library and tools > Virtual machine — Objects exist in a persistent image [+ changes] — Incremental compilation © Oscar Nierstrasz 1.4 ST — Introduction Smalltalk vs. C++ vs. Java Smalltalk C++ Java Object model Pure Hybrid Hybrid Garbage collection Automatic Manual Automatic Inheritance Single Multiple Single Types Dynamic Static Static Reflection Fully reflective Introspection Introspection Semaphores, Some libraries Monitors Concurrency Monitors Categories, Namespaces Packages Modules namespaces © Oscar Nierstrasz 1.5 ST — Introduction Smalltalk: a State of Mind > Small and uniform language — Syntax fits on one sheet of paper >
    [Show full text]
  • As We May Communicate Carson Reynolds Department of Technical Communication University of Washington
    As We May Communicate Carson Reynolds Department of Technical Communication University of Washington Abstract The purpose of this article is to critique and reshape one of the fundamental paradigms of Human-Computer Interaction: the workspace. This treatise argues that the concept of a workspace—as an interaction metaphor—has certain intrinsic defects. As an alternative, a new interaction model, the communication space is offered in the hope that it will bring user interfaces closer to the ideal of human-computer symbiosis. Keywords: Workspace, Communication Space, Human-Computer Interaction Our computer systems and corresponding interfaces have come quite a long way in recent years. We no longer patiently punch cards or type obscure and unintelligible commands to interact with our computers. However, out current graphical user interfaces, for all of their advantages, still have shortcomings. It is the purpose of this paper to attempt to deduce these flaws by carefully examining our earliest and most basic formulation of what a computer should be: a workspace. The History of the Workspace The modern computerized workspace has its beginning in Vannevar Bush’s landmark article, “As We May Think.” Bush presented the MEMEX: his vision of an ideal workspace for researchers and scholars that was capable of retrieving and managing information. Bush thought that machines capable of manipulating information could transform the way that humans think. What did Bush’s idealized workspace involve? It consists of a desk, and while it can presumably be operated from a distance, it is primarily the piece of furniture at which he works. On top are slanting translucent screens, on which material can be projected for convenient reading.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. with Examples of Different Programming Languages Show How Programming Languages Are Organized Along the Given Rubrics: I
    AGBOOLA ABIOLA CSC302 17/SCI01/007 COMPUTER SCIENCE ASSIGNMENT ​ 1. With examples of different programming languages show how programming languages are organized along the given rubrics: i. Unstructured, structured, modular, object oriented, aspect oriented, activity oriented and event oriented programming requirement. ii. Based on domain requirements. iii. Based on requirements i and ii above. 2. Give brief preview of the evolution of programming languages in a chronological order. 3. Vividly distinguish between modular programming paradigm and object oriented programming paradigm. Answer 1i). UNSTRUCTURED LANGUAGE DEVELOPER DATE Assembly Language 1949 FORTRAN John Backus 1957 COBOL CODASYL, ANSI, ISO 1959 JOSS Cliff Shaw, RAND 1963 BASIC John G. Kemeny, Thomas E. Kurtz 1964 TELCOMP BBN 1965 MUMPS Neil Pappalardo 1966 FOCAL Richard Merrill, DEC 1968 STRUCTURED LANGUAGE DEVELOPER DATE ALGOL 58 Friedrich L. Bauer, and co. 1958 ALGOL 60 Backus, Bauer and co. 1960 ABC CWI 1980 Ada United States Department of Defence 1980 Accent R NIS 1980 Action! Optimized Systems Software 1983 Alef Phil Winterbottom 1992 DASL Sun Micro-systems Laboratories 1999-2003 MODULAR LANGUAGE DEVELOPER DATE ALGOL W Niklaus Wirth, Tony Hoare 1966 APL Larry Breed, Dick Lathwell and co. 1966 ALGOL 68 A. Van Wijngaarden and co. 1968 AMOS BASIC FranÇois Lionet anConstantin Stiropoulos 1990 Alice ML Saarland University 2000 Agda Ulf Norell;Catarina coquand(1.0) 2007 Arc Paul Graham, Robert Morris and co. 2008 Bosque Mark Marron 2019 OBJECT-ORIENTED LANGUAGE DEVELOPER DATE C* Thinking Machine 1987 Actor Charles Duff 1988 Aldor Thomas J. Watson Research Center 1990 Amiga E Wouter van Oortmerssen 1993 Action Script Macromedia 1998 BeanShell JCP 1999 AngelScript Andreas Jönsson 2003 Boo Rodrigo B.
    [Show full text]
  • Supporting Concurrency Abstractions in High-Level Language Virtual Machines
    Faculty of Science and Bio-Engineering Sciences Department of Computer Science Software Languages Lab Supporting Concurrency Abstractions in High-level Language Virtual Machines Dissertation Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sciences Stefan Marr Promotor: Prof. Dr. Theo D’Hondt Copromotor: Dr. Michael Haupt January 2013 Print: Silhouet, Maldegem © 2013 Stefan Marr 2013 Uitgeverij VUBPRESS Brussels University Press VUBPRESS is an imprint of ASP nv (Academic and Scientific Publishers nv) Ravensteingalerij 28 B-1000 Brussels Tel. +32 (0)2 289 26 50 Fax +32 (0)2 289 26 59 E-mail: [email protected] www.vubpress.be ISBN 978 90 5718 256 3 NUR 989 Legal deposit D/2013/11.161/010 All rights reserved. No parts of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the author. DON’T PANIC ABSTRACT During the past decade, software developers widely adopted JVM and CLI as multi-language virtual machines (VMs). At the same time, the multicore revolution burdened developers with increasing complexity. Language im- plementers devised a wide range of concurrent and parallel programming concepts to address this complexity but struggle to build these concepts on top of common multi-language VMs. Missing support in these VMs leads to tradeoffs between implementation simplicity, correctly implemented lan- guage semantics, and performance guarantees. Departing from the traditional distinction between concurrency and paral- lelism, this dissertation finds that parallel programming concepts benefit from performance-related VM support, while concurrent programming concepts benefit from VM support that guarantees correct semantics in the presence of reflection, mutable state, and interaction with other languages and libraries.
    [Show full text]
  • Session 1: Introducing Extreme Java
    Extreme Java G22.3033-006 Session 1 – Main Theme Introducing Extreme Java Dr. Jean-Claude Franchitti New York University Computer Science Department Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences Agenda • Course Logistics, Structure and Objectives • Java Programming Language Features • Java Environment Limitations • Upcoming Features in “Tiger” 1.5 • Model Driven Architectures for Java Systems • Java Enterprise Application Enabling • Agile Modeling & eXtreme Programming • Aspect-Oriented Programming & Refactoring • Java Application Performance Enhancement • Readings, Class Project, and Assignment #1a 2 1 Course Logistics • Course Web Site • http://cs.nyu.edu/courses/spring03/G22.3033-006/index.htm • http://www.nyu.edu/classes/jcf/g22.3033-007/ • (Password: extjava) • Course Structure, Objectives, and References • See detailed syllabus on the course Web site under handouts • See ordered list of references on the course Web site • Textbooks • Mastering Java 2, J2SE 1.4 • J2EE: The Complete Reference • Expert One-on-One: J2EE Design and Development 3 Part I Java Features 4 2 Java Features Review • Language Categories • Imperative • Functional • Logic-based • Model-based PL Comparison Framework • Data Model • Behavioral Model • Event Model • Execution, Persistence, etc. • See Session 1 Handout on Java Review 5 J2SE 1.4 Features http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4/index.html 6 3 J2SE 1.4 Features (continued) • HotSpot virtual machine • Full 64-bit support • Improved garbage collection • Ability to exploit multiprocessing • Optimization of the Java2D
    [Show full text]