Advertisement

A Two-Dimensional Composition Framework to Support Software Adaptability and Reuse

  • Constantinos A. Constantinides
  • Atef Bader
  • Tzilla Elrad
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1844)

Abstract

As software systems become larger, the interaction of their components becomes more complex. This interaction may limit reuse, and make it difficult to validate the design and correctness of the system. As a result, re-engineering of these systems might be inevitable in order to meet future requirements. It has already been argued in the literature that the general feeling that Object-Oriented Programming promotes reuse and expandability by its very nature is rather a misconception as none of these issues is enforced. Rather, a software system must be specifically designed for reuse and expandability. Our work concentrates on the decomposition of concurrent object-oriented systems and in this paper we describe an aspect-oriented framework where both functional components and aspects are designed relatively separately from each other. This separation of concerns allows for reusability. Our goal is to achieve an improved separation of concerns in both design and implementation.

Keywords

Functional Component Position Paper Public Class Sequential Object Semantic Interaction 
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.
    Aksit, M.: Composition and Separation of Concerns in the Object-Oriented Model. ACM Computing Surveys 28A(4) (December 1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aksit, M.: Issues in Aspect-Oriented Software Development. In: Position paper at the ECOOP 1997 workshop on Aspect-Oriented Programming (1997)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bader, A., Elrad, T.: Framework and Design Pattern for Concurrent Passive Objects. In: Proceedings of IASTED/SE 1998 (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bader, A., Elrad, T.: The Adaptive Arena: Language Constructs and Architecural Abstractions for Concurrent Object-Oriented Systems. In: Proceedings of ICPADS 1998 (1998)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Becker, U.: D2AL: A Design-based Aspect Language for Distribution Control. Position paper at the ECOOP 1998 workshop on Aspect-Oriented Programming (1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berger, L., Dery, A.M., Fornarino, M.: Interactions Between Objects: An Aspect of Object-Oriented Languages. Position paper at the ECOOP 1998 Workshop on Aspect- Oriented Programming (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Böllert, K.: On Weaving Aspects. Position paper at the ECOOP 1999 workshop on Aspect- Oriented Programming (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Constantinides, C., Bader, A., Elrad, T.: An Aspect-Oriented Design Framework for Concurrent Systems. Position paper at the ECOOP 1999 workshop on Aspect-Oriented Programming (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Constantinides, C., Bader, A., Elrad, T.: A Framework to Address a Two-Dimensional Composition of Concerns. Position paper OOPSLA 1999 First Workshop on Multi-Dimensional Separation of Concerns in Object-Oriented Systems (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    De Volder, K.: Aspect-Oriented Logic Meta Programming. Position paper at the ECOOP 1998 workshop on Aspect-Oriented Programming (1998)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fayad, M., Cline, M.P.: Aspects of Software Adaptability. Communications of the ACM 39(10), 58–59 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hürsh, W.L., Lopes, C.V.: Separation of Concerns. Technical Report NU-CCS-95-03. Northeastern University, Boston, February 24 (1995)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kiczales, G., Lamping, J., Mendhekar, A., Maeda, C., Lopes, C., 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
  14. 14.
    Cristina, V., Lopes, D.: A language Framework for Distributed Programming. Ph.D. Thesis. Graduate School of the College of Computer Science. Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts (1997)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lopes, C., Kiczales, G.: Recent Developments in AspectJ. Position paper at the ECOOP 1998 workshop on Aspect-Oriented Programming (1998)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Matthijs, F., Joosen, W., Vanhaute, B., Robben, B., Verbaeten, P.: Aspects Should not Die. Position paper at the ECOOP 1997 workshop on Aspect-Oriented Programming (1997)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Matsuoka, S., Yonezawa, A.: Analysis of Inheritance Anomaly in Object- Oriented Concurrent Programming Languages. In: Agha, G., Wegner, P., Yonezawa, A. (eds.) Research Directions in Concurrent Object-Oriented Programming. Ch. 4, pp. 107–150. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1993)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Meyer, B.: Applying Design by Contract. IEEE Computer, 40–52 (October 1992)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ossher, H., Tarr, P.: Multi-Dimensional Separation of Concerns in Hyperspace. Position paper at the ECOOP 1999 workshop on Aspect-Oriented Programming (1999)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Parnas, D.L.: On the Criteria to be Used in Decomposing Systems into Modules. Communications of the ACM 15(12), 1053–1058 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pryor, J., Bastán, N.: A Reflective Architecture for the Support of Aspect- Oriented Programming in Smalltalk. Position paper at the ECOOP 1999 workshop on Aspect-Oriented Programming (1999)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tekinerdogan, B., Aksit, M.: Deriving Design Aspects from Canonical Models. Position paper at the ECOOP 1998 workshop on Aspect-Oriented Programming (1998)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vogel, A., Duddy, K.: JAVA programming with CORBA. John Wiley, New York (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Constantinos A. Constantinides
    • 1
  • Atef Bader
    • 2
  • Tzilla Elrad
    • 1
  1. 1.Concurrent Programming Research Center, Department of Computer ScienceIllinois Institute of TechnologyChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Lucent Technologies 

Personalised recommendations