J. Neighbors. An assessment of reuse technology after ten years. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Software Reuse, pages 6--13. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1994. Home/Search Document Details and Download
Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
To Reuse or To Be Reused: Techniques for Component Composition.. - de Jonge (2003) (Correct)
....cognitive distance of such domain independent abstractions is high and the payoff for reusing them is relatively small. On the other hand, software reuse can be successful in case it is domainspecific and the domain provides proper domain concepts for reusable artifacts (typical one word idioms) [132, 108]. Examples are math libraries for developers familiar with mathematical concepts, and domain specific application generators. These domain concepts describe artifacts in terms of what they do rather then how they do it and allow a software developer to reason in terms of these abstractions ....
....testing, distributing, and deployment are relatively easy for an application consisting of only a single component but become complex activities when the number of components increases. Apparently, the reuse processes development for reuse and development with reuse have conflicting goals [13, 108]. While the first process typically would deliver small, flexible, generally applicable components, the latter process demands large scale, domain specific components (see Table 1.1) The trade off between component size and reuse effort yields interesting software engineering challenges. Existing ....
J. Neighbors. An assessment of reuse technology after ten years. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Software Reuse, pages 6--13. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1994.
Reuse so Far: Phasing in a Revolution - Neighbors Self-citation (Neighbors) (Correct)
....architectures. 1. Introduction The panel mandate is to identify reuse technology successes and failures. In addition, our moderator [1] has challenged us to examine whether any reuse technology makes a revolutionary difference. To some degree I have already done this in my keynote address [3] but Biggerstaff brings up some interesting points. 2. What does a revolution look like For the sake of argument I claim that a factor of 10 improvement in the production of software is a revolution. This is a safe definition since it has been estimated that software productivity only improved ....
....is a revolution. This is a safe definition since it has been estimated that software productivity only improved about 3 to 8 per year [5] over a twenty year time frame that included the rise of Software Engineering, high level languages, and on line computing. I derived a short lifecycle model [3] using Boehm s data [2] for new development of a large project. The lifecycle phases and their percent of the total effort are: Requirements (req, 6 ) provide the function, performance, and external constraints on the system. Analysis (ana, 8 ) interrelates the data, function and external ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Neighbors, J.M., An Assessment of Reuse Technology after Ten Years, Proceedings 3rd Intl. Conf. on Reuse, IEEE Press, to appear 1994.
Finding Reusable Software Components in Large Systems - Neighbors (1996) (6 citations) Self-citation (Neighbors) (Correct)
....on their own volition developers made subsystem diagrams; put them on their office walls; and used them for reference, planning, and training. The architectural concept of subsystems is an important one for forward synthesis systems such as Draco that purport to address the building large systems [10]. We also believe that the subsystems can be a basis for converting an old system to object oriented programming as discussed in section 4.4.4. We were very much surprised that the curves for the two FORTRAN systems in Figure 2 and 3 were similar. The Pascal system curves show the same ....
Neighbors, J. "An Assessment of Reuse Technology after Ten Years", in 3rd International Conference on Software Reuse, IEEE Computer Society Press, Nov. 1994, pp. 6-13.
Domain Analysis and Generative Implementation - Neighbors (1998) (1 citation) Self-citation (Neighbors) (Correct)
....and restrained by the domain designers. Thus, subsystems deemed important by the system implementers are first refined (implemented) causing other subsystems to be constrained by the representation decisions made during the refinement. The architecture of the system evolves with these decisions [3]. Standard architectures are guides but not restrictions. Otherwise, what would one do with a system that composes two standard architectures 2. What results from domain analysis The result of domain analysis is a domain that supports the description of similar member systems. In Draco a ....
Neighbors, J. M., An Assessment of Reuse Technology after Ten Years, 3 rd International Conference on Software Reuse, pp. 6- 13, November 1994.
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