Abstract: Some implementations provide techniques and arrangements for interactive user interface operation and development. For instance, some implementations may generate a user interface data structure representing a user interface, the user interface data structure being generated based at least in part on state data and imperative programming code. Then, in response to a change in one of the imperative programming code or the state data, some implementations may update the user interface data structure and render an updated interactive graphical user interface based on the updated user interface data structure.

Abstract: Some implementations provide techniques and arrangements for interactive user interface operation and development. For instance, some implementations may generate a user interface data structure representing a user interface, the user interface data structure being generated based at least in part on state data and imperative programming code. Then, in response to a change in one of the imperative programming code or the state data, some implementations may update the user interface data structure and render an updated interactive graphical user interface based on the updated user interface data structure.

Abstract: A checking system is described for determining whether a component is thread safe in the course of interacting with two or threads in a client environment. The checking system uses a manual, automatic, or semi-automatic technique to generate a test. The checking system then defines a set of coarse-grained observations for the test, in which the component is assumed to exhibit linearizability when interacting with threads. The set of coarse-grained observations may include both complete and “stuck” histories. The checking system then generates a set of fine-grained observations for the tests; here, the checking system makes no assumptions as to the linearizability of the component. The checking system identifies potential linearizability errors as those entries in the set of fine-grained observations that have no counterpart entries in the set of coarse-grained observations. The checking system may rely on a stateless model checking module to perform its functions.

Abstract: A checking system is described for determining whether a component is thread safe in the course of interacting with two or threads in a client environment. The checking system uses a manual, automatic, or semi-automatic technique to generate a test. The checking system then defines a set of coarse-grained observations for the test, in which the component is assumed to exhibit linearizability when interacting with threads. The set of coarse-grained observations may include both complete and “stuck” histories. The checking system then generates a set of fine-grained observations for the tests; here, the checking system makes no assumptions as to the linearizability of the component. The checking system identifies potential linearizability errors as those entries in the set of fine-grained observations that have no counterpart entries in the set of coarse-grained observations. The checking system may rely on a stateless model checking module to perform its functions.

Abstract: A method and apparatus in which the observability of cross-invalidates requests within remote nodes is controlled at the time of a partial response generation, when a remote request initially checks/snoops the directory state of the remote node, but before such the time that the cross-invalidate request is actually sent to the processors on a given node. If all of the remote nodes in the system indicate that the cross-invalidates could be sent during an initial directory snoop, the requesting node is able to return full exclusivity to a given cache line to a requesting processor at the time when it receives all of the partial responses, instead of having to wait for the final responses from each of the remote nodes within the system.