Handling Dynamic Behaviour in Software Architectures

  • Sorana Cîmpan
  • Fabien Leymonerie
  • Flavio Oquendo
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3527)


More and more software applications have to be able to dynamically change during execution in order to adapt to changes in their environment. In the context of architecture-centred software development, this capability has to be expressed at the architectural level, inducing the need of architecture description languages capable of representing dynamic architectures. In this paper we propose an architecture description language for dynamic software architectures, the ArchWare C&C-ADL. This language uses the component-connector view, and is constructed as an architectural style on top of a more generic ADL, the ArchWare π-ADL (formal ADL based on strongly typed π-calculus). The mechanisms the language offers for the management of dynamic behaviour of software systems, as well as all the advantages of the language design are stressed in the paper. We illustrate the language concepts using dynamic client server architectures.


software architectures dynamic systems architecture description language 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    ArchWare Consortium: Architecting evolvable software. ARCHWARE European RTD Project IST-2001-32360 (2001-2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allen, R.: A Formal Approach to Software Architectures. PhD thesis, TR# CMU-CS-97-144, Carnegie Mellon University, School of Computer Science (1997)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Allen, R., Douence, R., Garlan, D.: Specifying and Analyzing Dynamic Software Architectures. In: Proceedings on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alloui, I., Garavel, H., Mateescu, R., Oquendo, F.: The Archware Architecture Analysis Language. ARCHWARE European RTD Project IST-2001-32360, Deliverable D3.1b (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bernardo, M., Ciancarini, P., Donatiello, L.: Architecting Systems with Process Algebras. Technical Report UBLCS-2001-7 (2001) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chaudet, C., Oquendo, F.: π-SPACE: A Formal Architecture Description Language Based on Process Algebra for Evolving Software Systems. In: Proceedings of 15th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2000), Grenoble, France (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cîmpan, S., Oquendo, F., Balasubramaniam, D., Kirby, G., Morrison, R.: The ArchWare ADL: Definition of The Textual Concrete Syntax. ARCHWARE European RTD Project IST-2001-32360, Deliverable D1.2b (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cîmpan, S., Leymonerie, F., Oquendo, F.: The ADL Foundation Styles Library. ARCHWARE European RTD Project IST-2001-32360, ArchWare Report R1.3b (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cuesta, C., de la Fuente, P., Barrio-Solorzano, M.: Dynamic Coordination Architecture through the use of Reflection. In: Proceedings of the 2001 ACM symposium on Applied computing, Las Vegas, Nevada, United States, pp. 134–140 (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Greenwood, M., Balasubramaniam, D., Cîmpan, S., Kirby, N.C., Mickan, K., Morrison, R., Oquendo, F., Robertson, I., Seet, W., Snowdon, R., Warboys, B., Zirintsis, E.: Process Support for Evolving Active Architectures. In: Oquendo, F. (ed.) EWSPT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2786, pp. 112–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Inverardi, P., Wolf, A.: Formal Specification an Analysis of Software Architectures Using the Chemical Abstract Machine Model. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 21(4) (1995)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kozen, D.: Results on the Propositional Mu-Calculus. Theoretical Computer Science 27, 333–354 (1983)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    LeMétayer, D.: Describing software architecture styles using graph grammars. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 24(7), 521–553 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leymonerie, F., Cîmpan, S., Oquendo, F.: Classification and Comparison for ADL Formalising Styles. Revue Génie Logiciel 62, 8–14 (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leymonerie, F.: ASL language and tools for architectural styles. Contribution to dynamic architectures description. PhD thesis, University of Savoie (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leymonerie, F., Cîmpan, S., Oquendo, F.: Blanc Dit Jolicoeur, L., Le Berre, D., Pourraz, F., Dindeleux, R., Montaud, A.: The Style-Based Customizer – Release 1, ARCHWARE European RTD Project IST-2001-32360, Deliverable D2.4b (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Medvidovic, N., Taylor, R.N.: A Framework for classifying and comparing architecture description languages. In: Proceedings of ESEC/FSE 1997, pp. 60–76. ACM Press, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Milner, R., Parrow, J., Walker, D.: A Calculus of Mobile Processes. Information and Computation, 1–40 (1992)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Oquendo, F.: π-ADL: an Architecture Description Language based on the higher-order typed π-calculus for specifying dynamic and mobile software architectures. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 29(3), 1–14 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Oquendo, F., Alloui, I., Cîmpan, S., Verjus, H.: The ArchWare ADL: Definition of The Abstract Syntax and Formal Semantics. ARCHWARE European RTD Project IST-2001-32360, Deliverable D1.1b (2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oquendo, F., et al.: Positioning Archware ADL w.r.t. the State of the Art. ARCHWARE European RTD Project IST-2001-32360 (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Perry, D.E., Wolf, A.L.: Foundations for the Study of Software Architecture. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 17(4) (1992)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ratcliffe, O., Cîmpan, S., Oquendo, F., Scibile, L.: Formalization of an HCI Style for Accelerator Restart Monitoring. In: Oquendo, F., Warboys, B.C., Morrison, R. (eds.) EWSA 2004. LNCS, vol. 3047, pp. 167–181. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Revillard, J., Benoit, E., Cîmpan, S., Oquendo, F.: Software Architecture for Intelligent Instrument Design. In: Proceedings of the 16th Int. Conf. on Software & Systems Engineering and their Apllications (ICSSEA 2003), Paris, France, vol. 3-17, pp. 1–10 (2003)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stuurman, S., Van Katwijk, J.: On-line change mechanisms: The software architectural level. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (1998)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Verjus, H., Azzaiez, S., Pourraz, F., Oquendo, F.: Final ArchWare Architecture Animator – Release 1 – Prototype. ARCHWARE European RTD Project IST-2001-32360, Deliverable D2.2b (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wermelinger, M.A.: Specification of Software Architecture Reconfiguration. PhD thesis, Universidade Nova de Lisboa (1999)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wile, D.: AML: An Architecture Meta Language. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, Cocoa Beach, pp. 183–190 (1999)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sorana Cîmpan
    • 1
  • Fabien Leymonerie
    • 1
  • Flavio Oquendo
    • 2
  1. 1.LISTIC, ESIA Ecole Supérieure d’Ingénieurs d’AnnecyUniversité de SavoieAnnecy CedexFrance
  2. 2.VALORIAUniversité de Bretagne-SudVannes CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations