Deep typechecking and refactoring

ABSTRACT

Large software systems are typically composed of multiple layers, written in different languages and loosely coupled using a string-based interface. For example, in modern web-applications, a server written in Java communicates with a database back-end by passing in query strings. This widely prevalent approach is unsafe as the analyses developed for the individual layers are oblivious to the semantics of the dynamically constructed strings, making it impossible to statically reason about the correctness of the interaction. Further, even simple refactoring in such systems is daunting and error prone as the changes must also be applied to isolated string fragments scattered across the code base.

We present techniques for deep typechecking and refactoring for systems that combine Java code with a database back-end using the Java Persistence API [10]. Deep typechecking ensures that the queries that are constructed dynamically are type safe and that the values returned from the queries are used safely by the program. Deep refactoring builds upon typechecking to allow programmers to safely and automatically propagate code refactorings through the query string fragments.

Our algorithms are implemented in a tool called QUAIL. We present experiments evaluating the effectiveness of QUAIL on several benchmarks ranging from 3,369 to 82,907 lines of code.We show that QUAIL is able to verify that 84% of query strings in our benchmarks are type safe. Finally, we show that QUAIL reduces the number of places in the code that a programmer must look at in order to perform a refactoring by several orders of magnitude.

REFERENCES

• 1: M. P. Atkinson , L. Daynès , M. J. Jordan , T. Printezis , S. Spence, An orthogonally persistent Java, ACM SIGMOD Record, v.25 n.4, p.68-75, Dec. 1996 [doi>10.1145/245882.245905]
• 2: Gavin M. Bierman , Erik Meijer , Mads Torgersen, Lost in translation: formalizing proposed extensions to c#, Proceedings of the 22nd annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object oriented programming systems and applications, October 21-25, 2007, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
• 3: Aske Simon Christensen, Anders Møller, and Michael I. Schwartzbach. P recise analysis of string expressions. In SAS, pages 1--18, 2003.
• 4: William R. Cook , Siddhartha Rai, Safe query objects: statically typed objects as remotely executable queries, Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Software engineering, May 15-21, 2005, St. Louis, MO, USA [doi>10.1145/1062455.1062488]
• 5: Ezra Cooper, Sam Lindley, PhilipWadler, and Jeremy Yallop. Links: Web programming without tiers. In FMCO, LNCS 4709. Springer, 2006.
• 6: Jacques-Antoine Dub, Rick Sapir, and Peter Purich. Oracle application server toplink application developers guide, 10g (9.0.4). Oracle Corporation, 2 003.
• 7: Michael Furr , Jeffrey S. Foster, Checking type safety of foreign function calls, Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGPLAN conference on Programming language design and implementation, June 12-15, 2005, Chicago, IL, USA
• 8: G. Hamilton and R. Cattell. Jdbc: A java sql api. Sun Microsystems, 1 997.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.4 Software/Program Verification
          Subjects: Reliability

General Terms:
Reliability, Verification

Keywords:
JPA query analysis, cross language refactoring, cross language typechecking