Advertisement

Dynamically Adapting the Behaviour of Software Components

  • Andrea Bracciali
  • Antonio Brogi
  • Carlos Canal
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2315)

Abstract

Available component-oriented platforms address software interoperability only at the signature level, while they do not provide suitable mechanisms for adapting components with mismatching interaction behaviour. This paper presents a methodology for automatically developing adaptors capable of solving behaviour mismatches between heterogeneous components. These adaptors are generated from abstract specifications of the intended connection between the components, by taking into account both signature interfaces and component behaviours.

Keywords

Software Architecture Software Component Process Algebra Behaviour Interface Heterogeneous Component 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    R. Allen and D. Garlan. A formal basis for architectural connection. ACM Trans. on Software Engineering and Methodology, 6(3):213–49, July 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Bracciali, A. Brogi, and F. Turini. Coordinating interaction patterns. In ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC’2001). ACM Press, 2001.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    C. Canal et al. Extending corba interfaces with protocols. Computer Journal, 44(5):448–462, 2001.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    C. Canal, E. Pimentel, and J. M. Troya. Specification and refinement of dynamic software architectures. In Software Architecture, pages 107–126. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. Compare, P. Inverardi, and A. L. Wolf. Uncovering architectural mismatch in component behavior. Science of Computer Programming, 33(2):101–131, 1999.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Ducasse and T. Richner. Executable connectors: Towards reusable design elements. In ACM Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE’97), number 1301 in LNCS. Springer Verlag, 1997.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    L. M. G. Feijs. Modelling Microsof COM using π-calculus. In Formal Methods’99, number 1709 in LNCS, pages 1343–1363. Springer Verlag, 1999.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Garlan, R. Allen, and J. Ockerbloom. Architectural mismatch: Why reuse is so hard. IEEE Software, 12(6):17–26, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Gaspari and G. Zavattaro. A process algebraic specification of the new asynchronous CORBAmessaging service. In Proceedings of ECOOP 99, number 1628 in LNCS, pages 495–518. Springer, 1999.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    G. T. Leavens and M. Staraman, editors. Foundations of Component-Based Systems. Cambridge University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. Magee, S. Eisenbach, and J. Kramer. Modeling darwin in the π-calculus. In Theory and Practice in Distributed Systems, number 938 in LNCS, pages 133–152. Springer Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. Magee, J. Kramer, and D. Giannakopoulou. Behaviour analysis of software architectures. In Software Architecture, pages 35–49. Kluwer Academic Pub., 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. Milner, J. Parrow, and D. Walker. Acalculus of mobile processes. Journal of Information and Computation, 100:1–77, 1992.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. Vallecillo, J. Hernández, and J. M. Troya. New issues in object interoperability. In Object-Oriented Technology: ECOOP 2000 Workshop Reader, number 1964 in LNCS, pages 256–269. Springer Verlag, 2000.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D. M. Yellin and R. E. Strom. Protocol specifications and components adaptors. ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, 19(2):292–333, March 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Bracciali
    • 1
  • Antonio Brogi
    • 1
  • Carlos Canal
    • 2
  1. 1.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversitá di PisaItaly
  2. 2.Depto. Lenguajes y Ciencias de la ComputaciónUniversidad de MálagaSpain

Personalised recommendations