Results 1 - 10
of
855
ArchJava: Connecting Software Architecture to Implementation
, 2001
"... Software architecture describes the structure of a system, enabling more effective design, program understanding, and formal analysis. However, existing approaches decouple implementation code from architecture, allowing inconsistencies, causing confusion, violating architectural properties, and inh ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 248 (29 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Software architecture describes the structure of a system, enabling more effective design, program understanding, and formal analysis. However, existing approaches decouple implementation code from architecture, allowing inconsistencies, causing confusion, violating architectural properties, and inhibiting software evolution. ArchJava is an extension to Java that seamlessly unifies software architecture with implementation, ensuring that the implementation conforms to architectural constraints. A case study applying ArchJava to a circuit-design application suggests that ArchJava can express architectural structure effectively within an implementation, and that it can aid in program understanding and software evolution.
Behavior Protocols for Software Components
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
, 2002
"... In this paper, we propose a means to enhance an architecture description language with a description of component behavior. A notation used for this purpose should be able to express the "interplay" on the component's interfaces and reflect step-by-step refinement of the component& ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 212 (32 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
In this paper, we propose a means to enhance an architecture description language with a description of component behavior. A notation used for this purpose should be able to express the "interplay" on the component's interfaces and reflect step-by-step refinement of the component's specification during its design. In addition, the notation should be easy to comprehend and allow for formal reasoning about the correctness of the specification refinement and also about the correctness of an implementation in terms of whether it adheres to the specification. Targeting all these requirements together, the paper proposes to employ behaviorprotocols which are based on a notation similar to regular expressions.
Staged configuration through specialization and multilevel configuration of feature models
- Software Process: Improvement and Practice
"... Abstract Feature modeling is a key technique for capturing commonalities and variabilities in system families and product lines. In this paper, we propose a cardinality-based notation for feature modeling, which integrates a number of existing extensions of previous approaches. We then introduce and ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 141 (14 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract Feature modeling is a key technique for capturing commonalities and variabilities in system families and product lines. In this paper, we propose a cardinality-based notation for feature modeling, which integrates a number of existing extensions of previous approaches. We then introduce and motivate the novel concept of staged configuration. Staged configuration can be achieved by the stepwise specialization of feature models or by multi-level configuration, where the configuration choices available in each stage are defined by separate feature models. Staged configuration is important because in a realistic development process, different groups and different people make product configuration choices in different stages. Finally, we also discuss how multi-level configuration avoids a breakdown between the different abstraction levels of individual features. This problem, sometimes referred to as “analysis paralysis”, easily occurs in feature modeling because features can denote entities at arbitrary levels of abstractions within a system family. Key words: Software product lines, system families, domain analysis, software configuration 1
An Infrastructure for the Rapid Development of XML-based Architecture Description Languages
- In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE2002
, 2002
"... Research and experimentation in software architectures over the past decade have yielded a plethora of software architecture description languages (ADLs). Continuing innovation indicates that it is reasonable to expect more new ADLs, or at least ADL features. This research process is impeded by the ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 131 (14 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Research and experimentation in software architectures over the past decade have yielded a plethora of software architecture description languages (ADLs). Continuing innovation indicates that it is reasonable to expect more new ADLs, or at least ADL features. This research process is impeded by the difficulty and cost associated with developing new notations. An architect in need of a unique set of modeling features must either develop a new architecture description language from scratch or undertake the daunting task of modifying an existing language. In either case, it is unavoidable that a significant effort will be expended in building or adapting tools to support the language. To remedy this situation, we have developed an infrastructure for the rapid development of new architecture description languages. Key aspects of the infrastructure are its XML-based modular extension mechanism, its base set of reusable and customizable architectural modeling constructs, and its equally important set of flexible support tools. This paper introduces the infrastructure and demonstrates its value in the context of several real-world applications.
Modeling Software Architectures in the Unified Modeling Language
- ACM TRANSACTIONS ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING AND METHODOLOGY
, 2002
"... This paper presents two strategies for supporting architectural concerns within UML. One strategy involves using UML "as is," while the other incorporates useful features of existing ADLs as UML extensions. We discuss the applicability, strengths, and weaknesses of the two strategies. The ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 114 (7 self)
- Add to MetaCart
This paper presents two strategies for supporting architectural concerns within UML. One strategy involves using UML "as is," while the other incorporates useful features of existing ADLs as UML extensions. We discuss the applicability, strengths, and weaknesses of the two strategies. The strategies are applied on three ADLs that, as a whole, represent a broad cross-section of present-day ADL capabilities. One conclusion of our work is that UML currently lacks support for capturing and exploiting certain architectural concerns whose importance has been demonstrated through the research and practice of software architectures. In particular, UML lacks direct support for modeling and exploiting architectural styles, explicit software connectors, and local and global architectural constraints
A Highly-Extensible, XML-Based Architecture Description Language
- Proceedings of the Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture
, 2001
"... Software architecture research focuses on models of software architectures as specified in architecture description languages (ADLs). As research progresses in specific areas of software architectures, more and more architectural information is created. Ideally, this information can be stored in the ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 109 (17 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Software architecture research focuses on models of software architectures as specified in architecture description languages (ADLs). As research progresses in specific areas of software architectures, more and more architectural information is created. Ideally, this information can be stored in the model. An extensible modeling language is crucial to experimenting with and building tools for novel modeling constructs that arise from evolving research. Traditional ADLs typically support a small set of modeling constructs very well, but adapt to others poorly. XML provides an ideal platform upon which to develop an extensible modeling language for software architectures. Previous XML-based ADLs successfully leveraged XML’s large base of off-the-shelf tool support, but did not take advantage of its extensibility. To give software architecture researchers more freedom to explore new possibilities and modeling techniques while maximizing reuse of tools and modeling constructs, we have developed xADL 2.0, a highly extensible XML-based ADL. xADL 2.0 supports run-time and design time modeling, architecture configuration management and model-based system instantiation. Additionally, xADL 2.0 has a set of extensible infrastructure tools that support the creation, manipulation, and sharing of xADL 2.0 documents.
Architecture-Level Modifiability Analysis
- Journal of Systems and Software
, 2002
"... Kaserntryckeriet, Karlskrona 2002 "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance.“ ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 91 (5 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Kaserntryckeriet, Karlskrona 2002 "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance.“
Reconciling the Needs of Architectural Description with Object-Modelling Notations
- In Proceedings of the 3 rd International Conference on the Unified Modelling Language (Models’00
, 2000
"... Abstract. Complex software systems require expressive notations for representing their software architectures. Two competing paths have emerged. One is to use a specialized notation for architecture – or architecture description language (ADL). The other is to adapt a general-purpose modeling notati ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 81 (14 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. Complex software systems require expressive notations for representing their software architectures. Two competing paths have emerged. One is to use a specialized notation for architecture – or architecture description language (ADL). The other is to adapt a general-purpose modeling notation, such as UML. The latter has a number of benefits, including familiarity to developers, close mapping to implementations, and commercial tool support. However, it remains an open question as to how best to use object-oriented notations for architectural description, and, indeed, whether they are sufficiently expressive, as currently defined. In this paper we take a systematic look at these questions, examining the space of possible mappings from ADLs into object notations. Specifically, we describe (a) the principle strategies for representing architectural structure in UML; (b) the benefits and limitations of each strategy; and (c) aspects of architectural description that are intrinsically difficult to model in UML using the strategies. 1
The K-Component Architecture Meta-Model for Self-Adaptive Software
- In Akinori Yonezawa and Satoshi Matsuoka, editors, Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Metalevel Architectures and Separation of Crosscutting Concerns (Reflection’2001), LNCS 2192
, 2001
"... Software architectures have recently emerged as a level of design concerned with specifying the overall structure of a system. Traditionally, software architectures only provide static descriptions of the participants and interaction structures in a system. Dynamic software architectures, however ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 69 (6 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Software architectures have recently emerged as a level of design concerned with specifying the overall structure of a system. Traditionally, software architectures only provide static descriptions of the participants and interaction structures in a system. Dynamic software architectures, however, can be reconfigured at runtime and therefore provide support for building dynamically adaptable applications. Software architectures can be specified using architectural reflection. In this paper we introduce an architecture meta-model that realises a dynamic software architecture. The architecture meta-model reifies the configuration graph of the architecture and is automatically generated from our component definitions and implementation language sourcecode.
