Re: Rather, DSSLs increase modularity, productivity

[Pascal Costanza <address@hidden>]

On 17 Nov 2003, at 20:39, Matthias Felleisen wrote:

> Even though you can write byte code and modify it with a class loader
> you still have to get it by the byte-code verifier. So, yes, you're 
> correct
> a type-soundness result for Java at the source level looks irrelevant. 
> But
> the question you really have to pose is how the type soundness for the
> Java type system relates to the soundness of the byte code verifier. As
> far as we know, the second result may imply the first one.
>
> I don't know whether anyone has looked into this connection. I'd expect
> so given the cottage industry on Java theory results.

The term you are looking for is "binary compatibility". It describes in 
what ways Java class files may change from release to release so that 
they don't break dependent programs.

Some of the issues are described in papers about JMangler. See 
http://javalab.iai.uni-bonn.de/research/jmangler/

I think Sophia Drossopoulou, and probably also others, are working on a 
formalization of the notion of binary compatibility.


Pascal

--
Tyler: "How's that working out for you?"
Jack: "Great."
Tyler: "Keep it up, then."