Abstract
The development of a meta-program includes two interrelated stages: (1) task specification resulting in creating of a specification model and (2) transformation of the model into a meta-program representation. In Chap. 10, we focus on the specification task. In general, the needed data to consider the task comes from three sources: requirements for generalization, domain model and domain program that is to be generalized. We accept that the domain model is obtained through domain analysis and the domain is represented by Feature Diagram(s). As Feature Diagrams may be general enough (e.g. they may represent the entire domain to be implemented as a software system), we need to analyse the model and extract some model patterns that are relevant to construct domain generators.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Burbaitė R, Damaševičius R, Štuikys V, Bespalova K, Paškevičius P (2011) Product variation modelling using feature diagrams and modal logic. In: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE international symposium on computational intelligence and informatics, 21–22 November 2011, Budapest, Hungary, pp 74–77
Biggerstaff TJ, Mitbander BW, Webster D (1993) The concept assignment problem in program understanding. In: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on software engineering. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, pp 482–498
Bosch J (2000) Design and Use of software architectures, adopting and evolving a product-line approach. Addison-Wesley, Reading
Brooks R (1983) Towards a theory of computer program comprehension. Int J Man Mach Stud 18:543–554
Chellas BF (1995) Modal logic: an introduction. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Damaševičius R (2009) On the human, organizational and technical aspects of software development and analysis. In: Papadopoulos GA, Wojtkowski W, Wojtkowski G, Wrycza S, Zupancic J (eds) Information system development: towards a service provision society. Springer, New York, pp 11–19
Détienne F (1996) What model(s) for program understanding? In: UCIS’96, colloque using complex information, Poitiers, France, 4–6 September 1996
Ferber S, Haag J, Savolainen J (2002) Feature interaction and dependencies: modeling features for reengineering a legacy product line. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on software product lines, SPLC 2, San Diego, CA, USA, 19–22 August 2002. LNCS, vol 2379. Springer, Berlin, pp 235–256
Van Gurp J, Bosch J, Svahnberg M (2001) On the notion of variability in software product lines. In: Working IEEE/IFIP conference on software architecture (WICSA 2001), 28–31 August 2001, Amsterdam, pp 45–54
Hallam P (2006) What do programmers really do anyway? In: Microsoft developer network (MSDN) C# compiler, January 2006
Hartmann H, Trew T (2008) Using feature diagrams with context variability to model multiple product lines for software supply chains. In: Proceedings of the 12th international software product line conference, SPLC’08, 8–12 September 2008, pp 12–21
Kang K, Cohen S, Hess J, Novak W, Peterson S (1990) Feature-oriented domain analysis (FODA) feasibility study. TR CMU/SEI-90-TR-21, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University
Kiczales G, Hilsdale E, Hugunin J, Kersten M, Palm J, Griswold WG (2001) An overview of AspectJ. In: Proceedings of 15th European conference on object-oriented programming (ECOOP01), June 2001. LNCS, vol 2072. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 327–352
Kang KC, Kim S, Lee J, Kim K, Kim GJ, Shin E (1998) FORM: a feature–oriented reuse method with domain–specific reference architectures. Ann Softw Eng 5:143–168
Kosar T, Mernik M, Crepinsek M, Henriques PR, da Cruz D, Pereira MJV, Oliveira N (2009) Influence of domain-specific notation to program understanding. Proc Int Multi-conf Comput Sci Inf Technol 4:675–682
LaToza TD, Garlan D, Herbsleb JD, Myers BA (2007) Program Comprehension as Fact Finding. In ESEC-FSE’07, September 3–7, Croatia, ACM, 2007
Lung C, Urban JE, Mackulak GT (2006) Analogy-based domain analysis approach to software reuse. Requir Eng 12(1):1–22
von Mayrhauser A, Vans AM (1995) Program understanding: models and experiments. In: Yovits MC, Zelkowitz MV (eds) Advances in computers, vol 40. Academic, Troy, pp 1–38
Peeger SL (2001) Software engineering: theory and practice. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River
Pereira MJV, Mernik M, da Cruz D, Henriques PR (2008) Program comprehension for domain-specific languages. J Comput Sci Inf Syst 5(2):1–17
Rugaber S (1995) Program comprehension. Encycl Comput Sci Technol 35(20):341–368
Shneiderman B (1980) Software psychology: human factors in computer and information systems. Little Brown, Boston
Storey MA (2005) Theories, methods and tools in program comprehension: past, present and future. In: Proceedings of the 13th international workshop on program comprehension (IWPC’05). IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, pp 181–191
Tilley SR, Smith DB (1996) Coming attractions in program understanding. Technical report CMU/SEI-96-TR-019, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh
Wiedenbeck S (1986) Beacons in computer program comprehension. Int J Man Mach Stud 25:697–709
Wang Y, Zhao J (2007) Specifying pointcuts in AspectJ. In: 31st annual international computer software and applications conference (COMPSAC 2007). IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag London
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Štuikys, V., Damaševičius, R. (2013). Meta-Programming Task Specification Using Feature-Based Patterns and Domain Program Scenarios. In: Meta-Programming and Model-Driven Meta-Program Development. Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing, vol 5. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4126-6_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4126-6_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-4125-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-4126-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)