Rising, L and Calliss, F. W., "Problems with determining package cohesion and coupling," Software - Practice and Experience, Vol. 22(7), July 1992, pp 553-571.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....1 3 Metrics Domain analysis 2 component association to extract recovery Software architecture or subsystems collection of modules Figure 1. Three phases of the evaluation model. SAAM [12] Rising determines the coupling and cohesion of the high level interaction of the Ada packages [18]; Eder extends the concepts of coupling and cohesion of the procedural programs to the object oriented programs [10] Briand compares the existing proposals for coupling and cohesion in object oriented systems and defines a unified framework to fill the in between gaps [9] 3 Software evaluation ....

L. Rising and F. W. Calliss. Problems with determining package cohesion and coupling. Software Practice and Experience, 22(7):553--571, July 1992.

....Then we will introduce our system in detail. At the end we will present our conclusions and propose future work. 2 Overview of Past Work ffl L. Rising and F. W. Calliss. Problems with determining package cohesion and coupling. em Software, Practice and Experience, 22(7) 553 571, July 1992. In [4] Rising and Calliss look at the problems with determining package cohesion and coupling. They proposed a taxonomy for the coupling categories. But they specifically look at the coupling and cohesion in Ada packages. Also they showed that the previous coupling categories are not sufficient to ....

L. Rising and F. W. Calliss. Problems with determining package cohesion and coupling. Software, Practice and Experience, 22(7):553--571, July 1992. 11

....value of a score function is sought at every step of the process. We use data mining and clustering techniques to evaluate the score function. Within this context, a module is defined as a conceptual and arbitrary large collection of consecutive source code fragments with an aggregate name [14, 24]. A module (e.g. M) is considered to be a collection of functions F, data types T , and variables V (including both the target system entities and the library items) that constitute a set of tuples of the form Module Relationship Entity . We can represent these tuples using the relations 3 ....

L. Rising and F. W. Calliss. Problems with determining package cohesion and coupling. Software Practice and Experience, 22(7):553--571, July 1992.

....Sim(p i ; q j ) m Theta n where P is a set of processes fp 1 ; pm g and fq j g is the set of user processes not in P with jfq j gj = n. Following the well known modularization criteria coupling cohesion, we expect good process clusters to show high cohesion and low coupling, see also [18, 43]. The characteristic vectors used to calculate the pairwise similarity are determined by a static source analysis. Preliminary studies showed that the resulting cohesion and coupling values do not always conform with the human evaluation of the same cluster. Particularly, multiple instantiations ....

Linda Rising and Frank W. Calliss. Problems with Determining Package Cohesion and Coupling. Software -- Practice and Experience, 22(7):553--571, July 1992.

....most frequently emphasized. A system, according to this concept, is structured to maximize the cohesion of elements in each module and to minimize the coupling between modules. A qualitative description of different levels of coupling and cohesion can be found in Fairley[8] or Rising and Calliss[24]. The measures discussed in this paper are attempts to quantify the degree of coupling and cohesion for a given software unit. As pointed out by Page Jones[21] coupling and cohesion are not two completely distinct concepts but two sides of the same coin. He generalizes coupling and cohesion into ....

Linda Rising and Frank W. Calliss. Problems with Determining Package Cohesion and Coupling. Software -- Practice and Experience, 22(7):553--571, July 1992.

....with the most important being the concept of coupling and cohesion. This criteria structures a system in a way that maximizes the cohesion of elements in each module and minimizes the coupling between modules. A qualitative description of different levels of coupling and cohesion can be found in [6, 8]. The measure presented here is an attempt to quantify the degree of coupling and cohesion for a given software unit. Throughout the rest of this paper, we will use the term good cluster to denote a group of application processes with a high degree of cohesion and a low degree of coupling with ....

Linda Rising and Frank W. Calliss, "Problems with Determining Package Cohesion and Coupling ", Software---Practice and Experience, vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 553--571, July 1992.

....from the IEEE. the measurement of module cohesion has been difficult to automate, and cohesion has not been effectively used as a software quality indicator [18] Existing techniques can measure or assess the cohesion of procedural code [5, 9, 2] structured design documents [15, 16] packages [13, 12, 3], and classes [4, 14, 1] Our objective is to develop techniques to objectively measure cohesion in terms of information available from the detailed design of modules in procedural programs. More precisely, for each procedure we assume that a detailed design includes the specification of a ....

L. Rising and F. Calliss. Problems with determining package cohesion and coupling. Software-Practice and Experience, 22(7):553--571, July 1992.

No context found.

Rising, L and Calliss, F. W., "Problems with determining package cohesion and coupling," Software - Practice and Experience, Vol. 22(7), July 1992, pp 553-571.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC