Skip to main content

The hidden function question revisited

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Algebraic Methodology and Software Technology (AMAST 1997)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1349))

Abstract

While some common algebraic specification languages provide hiding mechanisms, others do not support hiding at all. The hidden function question asks whether hiding facilities are actually necessary for a specification method to be adequate.

Concerning the initial algebra approach this question of adequacy is answered for years [Maj79, TWW82, BT87]. Here we give the answer for the loose approach (and also for the final algebra approach).

This research has been supported by the “Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft” within the “Schwerpunktprogramm Deduktion”.

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

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. M. Broy, C. Facchi, R. Grosu, R. Hettler, H. Hu\mann, D. Nazareth, F. Regensburger, and K. StØlen. The requirement and design specification language SPECTRUM — an informal introduction, version 1.0. Technical Report TUM-I9311, Technische Universität München, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  2. R.M. Burstall and J. Goguen. The semantics of Clear, a specification language. In Proc. 1979 Copenhagen Winter School on Abstract Software Specification, volume 86 of LNCS, pages 292–332. Springer, Berlin, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  3. R. Bull and K. Segerberg. Basic Modal Logic, volume II of Handbook of Philosophical Logic, pages 1–88. D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  4. J.A. Bergstra and J.V. Tucker. The completeness of the algebraic specification methods for computable data types. Information and Control, 54:186–200, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  5. J.A. Bergstra and J.V. Tucker. Initial and final algebra semantics for data type specifications: Two characterization theorems. SIAM J. Cornput., 12:366–387, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  6. J.A. Bergstra and J.V. Tucker. Algebraic specifications of computable and semicomputable data types. Theoret. Comput. Sci., 50:137–181, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  7. I. Cla\en. Revised ACT ONE: categorical constructions for an algebraic specification language. In Proc. Workshop on Categorical Methods in Computer Science with Aspects from Topology, Berlin, volume 393 of LNCS, pages 124–141. Springer, Berlin, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  8. O.-J. Dahl and O. Owe. Formal development with ABEL. In Proc. Workshop on Categorical Methods in Computer Science with Aspects from Topology, Berlin, volume 552 of LNCS, pages 320–362. Springer, Berlin, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  9. H. Ehrig and B. Mahr. Fundamentals of Algebraic Specification 1, Equations and Initial Semantics, volume 6 of EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  10. H.B. Enderton. A Mathematical Introduction to Logic. Academic Press, New York, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  11. W. Fey. Pragmatics, Concepts, Syntax, Semantics, and Correctness Notions of ACT TWO: An Algebraic Module Specification and Interconnection Language. PhD thesis, Technische Universität Berlin, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  12. M.J. Fischer and R.E. Ladner. Propositional dynamic logic of regular programs, Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 18:194–211, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  13. R. Fagin, L. Stockmeyer, and M. Vardi. On monadic NP vs. monadic co-NP. Information and Computation, 120:78–92, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Dov Gabbay. A general filtration method for modal logics. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 1:29–34, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  15. H. Gaifman. On local and non-local properties. In J. Stern, editor, Proc. of the Herbrand Symposium, Logic Colloquium'81, pages 105–135. North-Holland, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  16. M.-C. Gaudel. Structuring and modularizing algebraic specifications: the PLUSS specification language, evolutions and perspectives. In STAGS'92, 9th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, volume 577 of LNCS, pages 13–18. Springer, Berlin, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  17. C. George. The RAISE specification language: A tutorial. In S. Prehn and W.J. Toelenel, editors, VDM'91, Formal Software Development Methods, volume 551 of LNCS, pages 389–405. Springer, Berlin, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. Guttag and J. Horning. Larch: Languages and Tools for Formal Specification. Springer, Berlin, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  19. W. Hanf. Model-theoretic methods in the study of elementary logic. In J. Addison, L. Henkin, and A. Tarski, editors, Symposium on the Theory of Models, pages 132–145. North-Holland Publ. Co., Amsterdam, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  20. M.E. Majster. Limits of the ‘algebraic’ specification of abstract data types. In A CM SIGPLAN Notices, volume 12, pages 37–42, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  21. M.E. Majster. Data types, abstract data types and their specification problem. Theoret. Comput. Sci., 8:89–127, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  22. J. Meseguer and J.A. Goguen. Initiality, induction, and computability. In M. Nivat and J. Reynolds, editors, Algebraic Methods in Semantics, pages 459–541. Cambridge University Press, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  23. P. Mosses. CoFI: The Common Framework Initiative for algebraic specification and development. In TAPSOFT'97: Theory and Practice of Software Development, volume 1214 of LNCS, pages 115–137. Springer, Berlin, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  24. W. Reif. Correctness of full first-order specifications. In 4th Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering. Capri, Italy, IEEE Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  25. A. Schönegge. An answer to the hidden function question for algebraic specification methods (abstract), 4th Workshop on Logic, Language, Information and Computation, Fortaleza, Brazil. Logic Journal of the Interest Group in Pure and Applied Logic, Oxford University Press, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  26. J.M. Spivey. The Z Notation — A Reference Manual. Prentice-Hall, 2nd edition, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  27. D.T. Sannella and M. Wirsing. A kernel language for algebraic specification and implementation. In Proc. 1983 International Conference on Foundations of Computation Theory, Borgholm, volume 158 of LNCS, pages 413–427. Springer, Berlin, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  28. J.W. Thatcher, E.G. Wagner, and J.B. Wright. Data type specification: Parameterization and the power of specification techniques. In ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, volume 4, pages 711–732, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  29. J. van Benthem. Correspondence Theory, volume II of Handbook of Philosophical Logic, pages 167–247. D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  30. A. van Deursen, J. Heering, and P. Klint, editors. Language Prototyping, An Algebraic Specification Approach, volume 5 of AMAST Series in Computing. World Scientific Publishing Co., 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  31. M. Wirsing. Algebraic Specification, volume B of Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, chapter 13, pages 675–788. Elsevier Science Publishers B. V., 1990.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Michael Johnson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Schönegge, A. (1997). The hidden function question revisited. In: Johnson, M. (eds) Algebraic Methodology and Software Technology. AMAST 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1349. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0000489

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0000489

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-63888-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69661-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics