Advertisement

Engineering component-based systems with distributed object technology

  • Kurt Wallnau
  • Edwin Morris
  • Peter Feiler
  • Anthony Earl
  • Emile Litvak
Session A-2: Distributed Objects Environments
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1274)

Abstract

Distributed object technology (DOT) is the synthesis of object technology and distributed systems technology. While there is no universal approach to this synthesis, a number of technologies have emerged: SunSoft's Java, Microsoft's DCOM, and OMG's CORBA, to name just a few. The recent explosion of the worldwide web has given impetus to the adoption of DOT. In this paper we survey a broad range of implications concerning the use of DOT for integrating systems from large-scale software components. We discuss the architectural implications of DOT in terms of design patterns and middleware, and highlight the pragmatics of encapsulating components with DOT. We describe recent experiments we have conducted concerning interoperation among different DOTS. Finally, we outline some techniques that we have found to be useful for keeping abreast of the quickening developments in DOT.

Keywords

Design Pattern Software Product Line Object Management Group Coordination Model Java Object 
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.
    Brown, A., and Wallnau, K.: Engineering of Component-Based Systems, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, Montreal, Canada (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Garlan, D., and Shaw M.: An Introduction to Software Architecture, Advances in Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (1), River Edge, NJ: World Scientific Publishing Company (1993)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., and Vlissides, J.: Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software, Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-63361-2 (1995)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wallace, E. and Wallnau, K.: A Situated Evaluation of the Object Management Group's Object Management Architecture, in Proceedings of Object Oriented Programming Systems, Languages and Architectures (OOPSLA), USA (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Soley, R. (ed.): Object Management Architecture Guide, John Wiley and Sons, Inc. (1995)SGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rymer, J.: The Muddle in the Middle, Byte Magazine, April (1996). See also The Middleware Riddle in the same issue.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wallnau, K., Long, F., and Earl, A.: Toward a Distributed, Mediated Architecture for Workflow Management, in Proceedings of the NSF Workshop on Workflow and Process Automation in Information Systems, State of the Art and Beyond, see on-line proceedings at http://info.acm.org/coe/e7000010.html, USA (1996)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Calvin, J., and Weatherly, R.: An Introduction to the High Level Architecture (HLA) Runtime Infrastructure (RTI), in Proceedings of the 14th DIS Workshop on Distributed Simulation.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Garlan, D., Allen, R., and Ockerbloom, J.: Architectural Mismatch or Why It's Hard to Build Systems Out of Existing Parts, Proceedings of the International Conferences on Software Engineering, Seattle (1995)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brown, A., and Wallnau, K.: A Framework for Evaluating Software Technology, IEEE Software, September (1996) 39–49.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Auditore, P: A Kludge Beyond Relief, HP Professional, January (1997) 28–36.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kurt Wallnau
    • 1
  • Edwin Morris
    • 1
  • Peter Feiler
    • 1
  • Anthony Earl
    • 1
  • Emile Litvak
    • 1
  1. 1.Software Engineering InstituteCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations