Abstract There have been proposed and used many programming concepts for realizing interprocess communication and synchronization, and two fundamental categories among them are variable sharing (e.g. semaphores) and message passing (signals, input/output in CSP and redezvous in Ada). The aim of this paper is to investigate the relationship between these two mechanisms, and in particular, program transformation between them. We here propose a transformation method between parallel programs written in each of these two, which uses transformation schemes named monitor transformations. We exhibit the method by showing through a chain of program transformations the equivalence of two versions of a parallel algorithm called dynamic sorting array.

This paper describes a system which checks correctness of array accesses automatically without any inductive assertions or human interaction. For each array access in the program a condition that the subscript is greater than or equal to the lower bound and a condition that the subscript is smaller than or equal to the upper bound are checked and the results indicating within the bound, out of bound, or undetermined are produced. It can check ordinary programs at about fifty lines per ten seconds, and it shows linear time complexity behavior.It has been long discussed whether program verification will ever become practical. The main argument against program verification is that it is very hard for a programmer to write assertions about programs. Even if he can supply enough assertions, he must have some knowledge about logic in order to prove the lemmas (or verification conditions) obtained from the verifier.However, there are some assertions about programs which must always be true no matter what the programs do; and yet which cannot be checked for all cases. These assertions include: integer values do not overflow, array subscripts are within range, pointers do not fall off NIL, cells are not reclaimed if they are still pointed to, uninitialized variables are not used.Since these conditions cannot be completely checked, many compilers produce dynamic checking code so that if the condition fails, then the program terminates with proper diagnostics. These dynamic checking code sometimes take up much computation time. It is better to have some checking so that unexpected overwriting of data will not occur, but it is still very awkward that the computation stops because of error. Moreover, these errors can be traced back to some other errors in the program. If we can find out whether these conditions will be met or not before actually running the program, we can benefit both by being able to generate efficient code and by being able to produce more reliable programs by careful examination of errors in the programs. Similar techniques can be used to detect semantically equivalent subexpressions or redundant statements to do more elaborate code movement optimization.The system we have constructed runs fast enough to be used as a preprocessor of a compiler. The system first creates logical assertions immediately before array elements such that these assertions must be true whenever the control passes the assertion in order for the access to be valid. These assertions are proved using similar techniques as inductive assertion methods. If an array element lies inside a loop or after a loop a loop invariant is synthesized. A theorem prover was created which has the decision capabilities for a subset of arithmetic formulas. We can use this prover to prove some valid formulas, but we can also use it to generalize nonvalid formulas so that we can hypothesize more general loop invariants.Theoretical considerations on automatic synthesis of loop invariants have been taken into account and a complete formula for loop invariants was obtained. We reduced the problem of loop invariant synthesis to the computation of this formula. This new approach of the synthesis of loop invariant will probably give more firmer basis for the automatic generation of loop invariants in general purpose verifiers.