Accommodating Changing Requirements with EJB

  • Bart Du Bois
  • Serge Demeyer
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2817)


Component Based Software Development promises to lighten the task of web application developers by providing a standard component architecture for building distributed object oriented business applications. Hard evidence consolidat-ing this promise has yet to be provided, especially knowing that the standard libraries of today’s programming languages offer considerable support for distribution (e.g. remote method invocations, database interfaces). Therefore, this paper compares three Java implementations of the same functionality – one using straightforward library-calls, one using a custom-made framework and one using the Enterprise Java Beans framework (EJB) – to assess the maintainability of each of the approaches. We ob-serve that EJB results in better maintainability (code is less complex and exhibits more explicit weak coupling) but that the framework version without the framework cost results in comparable numbers. Therefore, we conclude that Component Based Software Development is necessary for building websystems that will continue to survive in the context of rapidly changing requirements.


maintainability evolution techniques comparison 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bosch, J., Bengtsson, P.: Assessing Optimal Software Architecture Maintainability. In: Proceedings of the Fifth European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering (CSMR 2001) (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chaumun, M.A., Kabaili, H., Keller, R.K., Lustman, F., Saint-Denis, G.: Design Properties and Object-Oriented Software Changeability (CSMR 2000) (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cheaito, R., Frappier, M., Matwin, S., Mili, A., Crabtree, D.: Defining and Measuring Maintainability, Technical Report, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Ottawa (1995) 1995Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Coleman, D., Ash, D., Lowther, B., Oman, P.: Using Metrics to Evaluate Software System Maintainability. IEEE Software (August 1994)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Christensen, K., Fistos, G.P., Smith, C.P.: A perspective on software science. IBM Systems Journal 20(4), 372–387 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Curtis, B.: The Measurement of Software Quality and Complexity. In: Perlis, A., Sayward, F., Shaw, M. (eds.) Software Metrics: An Analysis and Evaluation, ch. 2, pp. 203–224. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1981)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Du Bois, B.: Accommodating changing requirements with EJB, Masters Thesis (2002),
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    Fenton, N.E., Pfleeger, S.L.: Software Metrics - A Rigorous & Practical Approach, ITP, London (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fowler, M.: Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Glass, R.: Maintenance: Less is not More. IEEE Software (July/August 1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guimaraes, T.: Managing application program maintenance expenditure. Communications of the ACM 26(10) (October 1983)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Szyperski, C.: Component Software, Beyond Object-Oriented Programming. Addison Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kazman, R., Abowd, G., Bass, L., Clements, P.: Scenario-Based Analysis of Software Architecture. IEEE Software 13(13) (November 1996)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kiran, G.A., Haripriya, S., Jalote, P.: Effect of Object Orientation on Maintainability of Software. In: Proceedings of the ICSM 1997 (October 1997)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lehman, M., Lazlo, A.: Belady: Program Evolution: Processes of Software Change. Academic Press, London (1985)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Li, L., Offutt, A.J.: Algorithmic Analysis of the Impact of Changes to Object-Oriented Software. In: Proceedings of the ICSM 1996 (November 1996)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lientz, B.P., Swanson, E.B.: Software Maintenance Management. Addison Wesley, Reading (1980)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marinescu, R.: An Object Oriented Metrics Suite on Coupling. Universitatea Politehnica Timisoara, Facultatea de Automatica si Calculatoare, Departamentul de Calculatoare si Inginerie Software (1998)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pressman, R.: Software Engineering, A Practitioner’s Approach, 5th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bart Du Bois
    • 1
  • Serge Demeyer
    • 1
  1. 1.Lab On REengineering (LORE), Dept. of Mathematics and Computer ScienceUniversity of AntwerpBelgium

Personalised recommendations