A system model is developed where the criterion to partition the world into a system and a rest is based on the functional relation between its states. This approach implies that the gestalt of systems becomes very dynamic. Especially interactions between systems may create temporary super systems "on the fly". The reference to the function notion establishes the link to computation. Based on the distinction between the intended determinism versus nondeterminism of the interaction, two classes of system interactions are distinguished: composition and cooperation. Composition means that by interaction super systems are created and the interacting systems become subsystems. Cooperation means that systems sensibly interact loosely without creating any identifiable super system function and therefore without super system creation from the perspective of the interacting systems. Cooperative system interactions are described with the help of the protocol notion based on shared states, interpreted as the stateful exchange of characters via Shannon channels between roles - the projection of systems onto the interaction channels. It is shown that roles can be internally coordinated by a set of rules, leading to a very flexible process notion which unfolds its full potential only in a new type of execution environment capable of executing spontaneous transitions. The system model has immediate implications for componentization which can be viewed as an attempt to either hide functional recursion and provide only functionality whose composition behavior is easy to understand, or to provide loosely coupled interactions via protocols. To be complete, component models should therefore at least support three general classes of components: one for loose coupling, one for hierarchical composition, and one for pipes.
In my opinion it is false to conclude from the non-functional relation of the reactive systems to their interaction partners to their somehow non-functional functioning - or ''mode of operation''. Even reactive systems work in a step wise mode and at least for technical systems the simple fact holds that for being constructable, there has to be a function to be implemented - the system function. The main difference between ''transformational'' and ''reactive'' systems in the sense of David Harel and Amir Pnueli is not their functioning but - as they correctly point out - their relation to their environment. For ''transformational'' systems their interfaces towards the interaction provides access to the full system function and thereby provides deterministic interactions. ''transformational'' systems are composed hierarchically by composition according to the definition of sub super systems . By contrast, as I proposed already in @cite_3 , the interfaces of ''reactive'' systems provide access to at least two different projections of the systems, which I call ''roles'' and thereby only provide nondeterministic interactions.
@cite_3
2099640060
Algorithmic Debugging is a theory of debugging that uses queries on the compositional semantics of a program in order to localize bugs. It uses the following principle: if a computation of a program's component gives an incorrect result, while all the subcomputations it invokes compute correct results, then the code of this component is erroneous. Algorithmic Debugging is applied, in this work, to reactive systems, in particular to programs written in Flat Concurrent Prolog (FCP). Debugging reactive systems is known to be more difficult than the debugging of functional systems. A functional system is fully described by the relation between its initial input and final output; this context-freedom is used in debugging. A reactive system continuously responds to external inputs, thus its debugging cannot make use of context-free input output relations. Given a compositional semantic model for a concurrent programming language, we demonstrate how one can directly apply the ideas of Algorithmic Debugging to obtain a theory of program debugging for the considered language. The conflict between the context-freedom of input output relations and the reactive nature of concurrent systems is resolved by using semantic objects which record the reactive nature of the system's components. In functional algorithmic debugging the queries relate to input output relations; in concurrent algorithmic debugging the queries refer to semantic objects called processes which capture the reactive nature of FCP computations. A diagnosis algorithm for incorrect FCP programs is proposed. The algorithm gets an erroneous computation and using queries isolates an erroneous clause or an incomplete procedure. An FCP im