Finite State Machines and Object Orientation

  • R. Lewandowski
  • M. Mulazzani
Conference paper


Finite State Machines (FSM) are an established approach for modeling the behavior in reactive systems. At the same time object oriented techniques are spreading on the market. This report investigates Finite State Machines and their similarities to and extensions with object oriented concepts.

First, basic similarities of the traditional Finite State Machines with respect to object orientation are explored, covering encapsulation, typing, system structuring and instantiation. Then, some object oriented extensions of FSMs (inheritance, virtual transitions,...) are shown with the example of OSDL (currently under standardization by CCITT, an OO extension of SDL from CCITT). Finally, state charts from Harel are investigated. They provide extensions to FSMs which are not object oriented. But there exists an interesting mapping of their extensions to classes, inheritance and composition, providing a new view on FSMs, states and transitions.


Finite State Machine State Transition Matrix Object Orientation Object Orient State Transition Diagram 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [Booc9la]
    G. Booch, “Object Oriented Design with Applications”, Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, 1991.Google Scholar
  2. [Booc9lb]
    G. Booch, M. Goldberg, “Object Oriented Design”, Rational Course Handout, 30. Oct. 1991.Google Scholar
  3. [CCIT86]
    G. Booch, M. Goldberg, “The CCITT High Level Language CHILL User’s Manual”,International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative Committee (CCITT), Geneva, 1986.Google Scholar
  4. [CCIT89]
    G. Booch, M. Goldberg, “CCITT BlueBook,RecommendationsZ.100: Functional Specification and DescriptionLanguage (SDL)”, International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative Committee ( CCITT ), Geneva, 1989.Google Scholar
  5. [Coad91]
    P. Coad, E. Yourdon, “Object Oriented Analysis”, Yourdon Press Computing Series, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. [Hatl87]
    D.H. Hatley, I.A. Pirbhai, “Strategies for Real—Time System Specification”, Dorset House Publishing, 1987.Google Scholar
  7. [Hare87]
    D. Harel, “Statecharts: A visual formalism for complex systems”, Science of Computer Programming, Vol. 8, pp. 231–247.Google Scholar
  8. [Hopc79]
    J.E. Hoperoft, J.D. Ullman, “Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation”, Addison—Welsey Publishing Company, 1979.Google Scholar
  9. [Hüne91]
    I. Hüneke, “Finite State Machines: a model of behaviorfor C++”, The C++ Report, Vol. 3 /1, Jan. 1991Google Scholar
  10. [Meye88]
    B. Meyer, “Object Oriented Software Construction”, Prentice Hall, 1988.Google Scholar
  11. [Mo1187]
    B. Moller—Pedersen, D. Belsnes, “Rationale and Tutorial on OSDL: An Object—Oriented Extension of SDL”, Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, Vol. 13 /2, pp. 97–117, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [Rumb9l]
    J. Rumbaugh, M. Blaha, W. Premerlani, E Eddy, W. Lorensen, “Object—Oriented Modeling and Design”, Prentice Hall, 1991.Google Scholar
  13. [Saca89]
    R. Sacaro, J.R.W. Smith, Telecommunications System Engineering using SDL“, Elsevier Science Pub-lishersB.V., 1989.Google Scholar
  14. [Stro88]
    B. Stroustrup, “What is Object—Oriented Programming?”, IEEE Software, Vol. 5 /3, pp. 10–20, May 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [Vans91]
    J. Vanslembrouck, “Relating Extended Finite State Machines with Object—Orientation”, Software Engineering Report nr. 914009, Alcatel Bell Telephone, Jan 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag/Wien 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Lewandowski
    • 1
  • M. Mulazzani
    • 1
  1. 1.Alcatel Austria-ELIN Research CentreViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations