Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A pragmatic proposal for the improvement of program modularity and reliability

  • Published:
International Journal of Computer & Information Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Thedomain concept-discussed in an earlier paper-is essentially no more than a generalization of the classical operating system monitor. It is argued that domain machines may be put into immediate practical use in order to further and enhance the modularity and reliability of general software. By providing an arbitrary number of monitor-like protective structures, the monitor's proven advantages of database protection and controlled procedure entry points may be applied-within the domain machine's run-time environment-at a much finer level of modular resolution. Examples are given to demonstrate the domain architecture's ability to interdict (and intercept!) various software error conditions. It is suggested that in view of present economic realities (increasingly expensive software, ever less expensive hardware), the potential improvement of software quality through use of a more sophisticated hardware base may be worth considering by the industry.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J. N. Buxton and B. Randell, Eds.,Software Engineering, 1969 NATO Conference Report (NATO Scientific Affairs Division, Brussels, Belgium, April 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  2. F. J. Corbato, “PL/1 as a tool for systems programming,” inDatamation 15(6):68–76 (June 1969).

    Google Scholar 

  3. J. B. Dennis, “A position paper on computing and communication,” inProc. 1st ACM SIGOPS Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Gatlinburg, Tennessee, October 1969).

    Google Scholar 

  4. PDP-11/45 Processor Handbook (Digital Equipment Corporation, Maynard, Massachusetts, 1973).

  5. E. W. Dijkstra, “The structure of the ‘THE’ multiprogramming system,”Comm. ACM 11(5):341–346 (May 1968).

    Google Scholar 

  6. B. Elspaset al., “An assessment of techniques for proving program correctness,”ACM Computing Surveys 4(3):97–147 (June 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  7. R. M. Fano, “The computer utility and the community,”IEEE International Convention Record 12:30–37 (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  8. P. Naur and B. Randeil, Eds.,Software Engineering Techniques, 1968 NATO Conference Report (NATO Scientific Affairs Division, Brussels, Belgium, January 1969).

    Google Scholar 

  9. D. L. Parnas, “On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules,”Comm. ACM 15 (12): 1053–1058 (December 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. H. Saltzer, “'Traffic control in a multiplexed computer system,” M.I.T.Se. D. Dissertation, Project MAC Technical Report TR-30, Cambridge, Massachusetts (July 1966).

  11. M. J. Spier, “Process communication prerequisites, or the IPC-setup revisited,” inProc. 1973 Sagamore Conference on Parallel Processing (University of Syracuse, August 1973), pp. 79–88.

  12. M. J. Spier, “A model implementation for protective domains,”Int. J. Comp. Inf. Sei. 2(3):201–229 (September 1973).

    Google Scholar 

  13. M. J. Spier, “A system-theoretical look at the complexity of access control mechanisms,”Proc. International Workshop on Protection in Operating Systems (IRIA, Rocquencourt, France, August 1974), pp. 225–241.

    Google Scholar 

  14. M. J. Spier, T. N. Hastings, and D. N. Cutler, “A storage mapping technique for the implementation of protective domains,” inSoftware — Practice and Experience 4(3):215–230 (September 1974).

    Google Scholar 

  15. W. S. Wulf, D. B. Rüssel, and A. N. Habermann, “BLISS: a language for systems programming,”Comm. ACM 14(12):780–790 (December 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  16. W. S. Wulf and M. Shaw, “Global variable considered harmful,”ACM SIGPLAN Notices 8(2):28–34 (February 1973).

    Google Scholar 

  17. M. E. Hopkins, in J. N. Buxton and B. Randell, eds.,Software Engineering, 1969 NATO Conference Report (NATO Scientific Affairs Division, Brussels, Belgium, April 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. J. Aron, in J. N. Buxton and B. Randell, eds.,Software Engineering, 1969 NATO Conference Report (NATO Scientific Affairs Division, Brussels, Belgium, April 1970).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Software Engineering Department, Digital Equipment Corporation, Maynard, Massachusetts

    Michael J. Spier

Authors
  1. Michael J. Spier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This paper is a statement of the author's personal position, which is not necessarily that of Digital Equipment Corporation. It may not be construed to imply any product commitment by Digital Equipment Corporation.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Spier, M.J. A pragmatic proposal for the improvement of program modularity and reliability. International Journal of Computer and Information Sciences 4, 133–149 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00976240

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00976240

Key words

Search

Navigation