Journal of KIISE:Software and Applications (한국정보과학회논문지:소프트웨어및응용)

Korean Institute of Information Scientists and Engineers (한국정보과학회)
권호 표지

Approach to Specify a Component using Component Structure in Product Lines

제품 라인에서 컴포넌트 구조를 활용한 컴포넌트 스펙 방법

  • 조혜경 (포항공과대학교 컴퓨터공학과)
  • Published : 2006.03.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Product line is nowadays well known as a representative method for reuse. In the product line, important assets are components. Although enough concerns were given of the product line, it was not accomplished to structure and specify a product-line component with variability. This paper presents an approach to specify components in the product line. The approach describes the static and dynamic structure of a product-line component and explains the behavior and concurrency of the component. The component information is separately described in the black-box and white-box using the Feature-Oriented Reuse Method(FORM). This research also formalizes the data on a component specification in the form of BNF. The specification is described through careful consideration for many different characteristics of the product-line component, so this paper helps to easily develop the components in the product line and to well comprehend how to apply a method for the product line.

제품 라인은 재사용을 위한 연구 방법으로 널리 인식되어 왔다. 제품 라인에서 대표적인 중요 자산은 소프트웨어 컴포넌트이다. 그러나, 제품 라인에 대한 많은 관심에 비해 제품 라인에서 컴포넌트 구조 및 스펙에 대한 연구는 아직 미흡하다. 본 논문은 제품 라인에서 가변성(variability)을 반영한 컴포넌트 구조와 컴포넌트 스펙 방법을 제시한다. 본 논문은 FORM(Feature-Oriented Reuse Method)을 기반으로 제품 라인 컴포넌트의 정적 및 동적 구조, 제품 라인 컴포넌트의 행동 및 동시성 정보를 기술한다. 제품 라인 컴포넌트 스펙에 대한 각 정보는 블랙박스(black-box)와 화이트박스(white-box) 형태로 구분되어 기술되며 각 스펙 정보는 BNF로 정형화된다. 그 스펙들이 제품 라인 컴포넌트의 많은 서로 다른 특징의 충분한 고려를 통해 기술되기 때문에 본 논문은 제품 라인에서 컴포넌트의 손쉬운 개발을 돕고 제품라인 공학 방법론의 적용 방법을 잘 이해하도록 돕는다.

Keywords

References

  1. Kang, K., Kim, S., Lee, J., Kim, K. et aI., 'FORM: A Feature-Oriented Reuse Method with domain-specific reference architectures,' Annals of Software Engineering, vol. 5, pp. 143-168, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018980625587
  2. Chastek, G., Donohoe, P. and McGregor, J. D., A Study of Product Production in Software Product Lines, Technical Note, CMU/SEI-2004-TN-012, p. 5, 2004
  3. D'Souza, D.F. and Wills, A.C., Objects, Components and Frameworks with UML, Addison-Wesley, 1998
  4. Atkinson, C. et al., Component-Based Product Line Engineering with UML, Addison-Wesley, 2001
  5. Brown, A.W. and Barn, B., 'Enterprise-scale CBD: building complex computer systems from components,' Sterling Software, STEP '99, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1109/STEP.1999.798482
  6. Dias, M.S. and Vieira, M.E.R., 'Software architecture analysis based on statechart semantics,' IWSSD'00, IEEE, 2000 https://doi.org/10.1109/IWSSD.2000.891134
  7. Beugnard, A., Jezequel, J.M., Plouzeau, N. et aI., 'Making components contract aware,' Computer 32 (7), IEEE, pp. 38-45, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1109/2.774917
  8. Fettke, P. and Loos, P., 'Specification of business components,' LNCS 2591, Springer-Verlag, pp. 62-75, 2003
  9. Albani, A., Keiblinger, A., Turowski, K. et al., 'Domain based identification and modelling of business component applications,' LNCS 2798, Springer-Verlag, pp. 30-45, 2003
  10. Bachmann, F., Bass, L., Buhman, C. et aI., Volume II: Technical Concepts of Component-Based Software Engineering, Technical Report, CMU/SEI2000-TR-008, 2000
  11. Taulavuori, A., Component Documentation in The Context of Software Product Lines, VTT Publications 484, VTT Electronics, Espoo, 2002
  12. Taulavuori, A., Niemel, E. et aI., 'Component document - a key issue in software product lines,' Information and Software Technology 46, VTT Electronics, pp. 535-546, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2003.10.004
  13. Ommering, R.V., 'Building product populations with software components,' ICSE'02, pp. 255-265, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1145/581339.581373
  14. Sharp, D., 'Exploiting object technology to support product variability,' Proceedings of 18th Digital Avionics Systems Conference, IEEE, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1109/DASC.1999.863671
  15. Anastasopoulos, M. and Gacek, C., 'Implementing product line variabilities,' ECOOP, ACM, pp. 109-117, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1145/375212.375269
  16. Myllymaki, T., Variability Management in Software Product Lines, Technical Report of Software Systems Laboratory, Tampere University of Technology, pp. 23-26, 2001
  17. Lamsweerde, A.V., 'Formal specification: a road-map,' ICSE'00, pp. 147-159, 2000 https://doi.org/10.1145/336512.336546
  18. Matinlassi, M., Niemela, E. and Dobrica, L., Quality-driven Architecture Design and Quality Analysis Method, VTT Electronics, http://www.inf.vtt.fi/pdf/pu blications/2002/P456.pdf, 2002
  19. America, P., Obbink, H., Muller, J. and Ommering, R.V., 'COPA: A Component-Oriented Platform Architecting method for families of software intensive electronic products,' SPLC1, http://www.extra. research.philips.com/sae/copa/copa_tutorial.pdf, 2000
  20. Jayaratna, N., Understanding and Evaluating Methodologies : NIMSAD : A Systematic Framework. McGrawHill, London, 1994
  21. Matinlassi, M., Comparison of Software Product Line Architecture Design Methods: COPA, FAST, FORM, KobrA and QADA, VTT Electronics, ICSE, 2004