Advertisement

Aspects for Synthesizing Applications by Refinement

  • David Lesaint
  • George Papamargaritis
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3107)

Abstract

GenVoca is a powerful model for component-based product-line architectures (PLAs) advocating stepwise refinement as a composition principle. This paper introduces a refinement-oriented generative language – ReGaL – to implement statically configurable GenVoca PLAs. Whereas components are programmed in Java, refinements are program-med in ReGaL by the means of generic aspects. Applications are themselves specified in ReGaL as type equations. ReGaL compiles type equations by instantiating and weaving refinement aspects with components to synthesize the requested (Java) application. As opposed to template-based generative implementations, ReGaL promotes a clean separation of components and refinements, hence eliminating code tangling and related issues. It also defers the choice of component class composition structures until configuration time, which provides added flexibility to adapt applications. Besides, its architecture model enforces a clear role-based design of components and supports useful architectural patterns.

Keywords

Type Equation Graph Algorithm Architectural Pattern Parent Constructor Parent 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. [BCRW00]
    Batory, D., Chen, G., Robertson, E., Wang, T.: Design wizards and visual programming environments for genvoca generators. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering 26(5), 441–452 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [BCSOO]
    Batory, D., Cardone, R., Smaragdakis, Y.: Object-oriented frameworks and product-lines. In: Donohoe, P. (ed.) Proc. of the First Software Product-Line Conference, Denver, Colorado, USA, pp. 227–247 (2000)Google Scholar
  3. [BG97]
    Batory, D., Geraci, B.J.: Composition validation and subjectivity in GenVoca generators. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering (special issue on Software Reuse) 23, 62–87 (1997)Google Scholar
  4. [BLS98]
    Batory, D., Lofaso, B., Smaragdakis, Y.: JTS: Tools for implementing domain-specific languages. In: Proc. of ICSR 1998, Victoria, Canada (1998)Google Scholar
  5. [CBMLO2]
    Cardone, R., Brown, A., McDirmid, S., Lin, C.: Using mixins to build flexible widgets. In: Proc. of AOSD 2002, Enschede, The Netherlands (2002)Google Scholar
  6. [CCO1]
    Cardone, R., Calvin, L.: Comparing frameworks and layered refinement. In: Proc. of ICSE 2001, Toronto, Canada, pp. 285–294 (2001)Google Scholar
  7. [CEOO]
    Czarnecki, K., Eisenecker, U.: Generative Programming: Methods, Tools and Applications. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2000)Google Scholar
  8. [Dis76]
    Disjkstra, E.W.: A Discipline of Programming. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1976)Google Scholar
  9. [HHG9O]
    Helm, R., Holland, I.M., Gangopadhyay, D.: Contracts: Specifying behavioural compositions in object-oriented systems. In: Proc. of OOPSLA/ECOOP 1990. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, pp. 169–180 (1990)Google Scholar
  10. [Hol92]
    Holland, I.M.: Specifying reusable components using contracts. In: Lehrmann Madsen, O. (ed.) ECOOP 1992. LNCS, vol. 615, pp. 287–308. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [KHH+O1]
    Kiczales, G., Hilsdale, E., Hugunin, J., Kersten, M., Palm, J., Griswold, W.G.: An overview of aspectJ. In: Knudsen, J.L. (ed.) ECOOP 2001. LNCS, vol. 2072, pp. 327–352. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [KLM+97]
    Kiczales, G., Lamping, J., Mendhekar, A., Maeda, C., Lopes, C.V., Loingtier, J.-M., Irwin, J.: Aspect-oriented programming. In: Aksit, M., Matsuoka, S. (eds.) ECOOP 1997. LNCS, vol. 1241, pp. 220–242. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [LPO4]
    Lesaint, D., Papamargaritis, G.: Aspects and constraints for implement- ing configurable product-line architectures. In: Proc. of WICSA-4, Oslo, Norway (June 2004) (to appear)Google Scholar
  14. [OstO2]
    Ostermann, K.: Dynamically composable collaborations with delegation layers. In: Magnusson, B. (ed.) ECOOP 2002. LNCS, vol. 2374, pp. 327–352. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  15. [PSROO]
    Pulvermuller, E., Speck, A., Rashid, A.: Implementing collaboration-based designs using aspect-oriented programming. In: Proc. of TOOLS-USA 2000, pp. 95–104. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2000)Google Scholar
  16. [SB98]
    Smaragdakis, Y., Batory, D.: Implementing layered designs with mixin layers. In: Jul, E. (ed.) ECOOP 1998. LNCS, vol. 1445, pp. 550–570. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [SBO1]
    Smaragdakis, Y., Batory, D.: Mixin-layers: An object-oriented im- plementation technique for refinements and collaboration-based designs. ACM Trans. on Software Engineering and Methodology 11(2), 215–255 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [VHN96]
    Van Hilst, M., Notkin, D.: Using role components to implement collaboration-based designs. In: Proc. of OOPSLA 1996, San Jose, USA, ACM Press, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  19. [Wir71]
    Wirth, N.: Program development by stepwise refinement. Communications of the ACM 14(4), 221–227 (1971)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Lesaint
    • 1
  • George Papamargaritis
    • 1
  1. 1.BT Exact, Intelligent Systems LabSuffolkU.K.

Personalised recommendations