Software reuse in an educational perspective
Software is largely developed from scratch, whereas other engineering disciplines tend to use mass produced, off-the-shelf components. Reuse still fails to have any massive impact in the software field beyond the low level functional libraries provided with various compilers.
We believe that this can partly be attributed to the neglect of reuse in the current software engineering education. This is illustrated by the contents of the computer science subjects at our university (NTH), which is believed to be representative of the international mainstream.
Based on our work in the REBOOT project, we divide the problems concerning reuse into a set of major topics which we think should be covered in a thorough software engineering education and discuss how reuse could be included in the curriculum.
KeywordsSoftware Engineering Engineering Discipline Software Reuse Norwegian Institute Reusable Component
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Frederick P. Brooks jr. No silver bullet: Essence and accidents of software engineering. In H.-J. Kugler, editor, Proc. Information Processing'86. North-Holland, IFIP, 1986.Google Scholar
- Bruce A. Burton et al. The reusable software library. IEEE Software, pages 25–33, July 1987. The RSL is developed at Intermetics, Inc.Google Scholar
- Peter J. Denning et al. Computing as a discipline. Comm. of the ACM, 32(1):9–23, January 1989. Final Report of the Task Force on the Core of Computer Science, prepared for the ACM Education Board.Google Scholar
- Mary Fontana et al. COOL—C++ Object-Oriented Library. Technical report, Texas Instruments Inc., 1990.Google Scholar
- Sanjiv Gossain and Bruce Anderson. An iterative-design model for reusable object-oriented software. In ECOOP/OOPSLA '90 Proceedings, University Of Essex, UK, October 1990. ECOOP/OOPSLA.Google Scholar
- Guttorm Sindre, Even-André Karlsson, Patricia Paul. Heuristics for maintaining a term space structure for relaxed search. In Proc. DEXA'92, Valencia. Springer Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar
- Even-André Karlsson, Sivert Sørumgård, and Eirik Tryggeseth. Classification of Object-Oriented Components for Reuse. In Proc. TOOLS'7, Dortmund. Prentice-Hall, 1992.Google Scholar
- B. Langefors. Theoretical Analysis of Information Systems. Studentliteratur, Auerbach, first edition, 1973.Google Scholar
- John A. Lewis, Sallie M. Henry, Dennis G. Kafura, and Robert S. Schulman. An empirical study of the object-oriented paradigm and software reuse. In OOPSLA 91, 1991.Google Scholar
- Mark A. Linton, Paul R. Calder, John A. Interrante, Steven Tang, and John M. Vlissides. InterViews Reference Manual, Version 3.0. The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, 1991.Google Scholar
- James Neighbors. The DRACO approach to constructing software from reusable components. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 10(5):564–574, September 1984.Google Scholar
- Ruben Prieto-Diaz and Peter Freeman. Classifying software for reusability. IEEE Software, pages 6–16, January 1987.Google Scholar
- S. R. Ranghanathan. Prolegomena to Library Classification. Asia Publishing House, Bombay, India, 1967.Google Scholar
- T. Reenskaug et al. OORASS: seamless support for the creation and maintenance of object oriented systems. Journal of Object Oriented Programming, Summer 1992.Google Scholar
- H. Rittel. On the planning crisis: Systems analysis of the first and second generations. Bedriftsøkonomen, (8), 1972.Google Scholar
- Mary Beth Rosson and John M. Carroll. A view match for reusing smalltalk classes. In Proceedings of CHI'91, pages 277–283, 1991.Google Scholar
- Arne Sølvberg and Chenho Kung. Information Systems Engineering. Springer Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar
- Will Tracz. Software reuse myths. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, January 1988.Google Scholar