[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.5555/1753235.1753237acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessplcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Dealing with fine-grained configurations in model-driven SPLs

Published: 24 August 2009 Publication History

Abstract

In Model-Driven SPL approaches, the derivation of a product starts from a domain application model. This model is transformed using model transformations, which are selected according to variants included in configurations, until a product is obtained. There are at least two drawbacks to these approaches. First, the selection of variants affects the whole domain application model, impeding fine-grained configurations, i.e. configurations at the level of each element in the model, and second, model transformations are coupled with variants which make their maintenance and adaptation difficult. We present an approach that uses meta-modeling and feature modeling. A novelty in our approach is the possibility of configuring a product from a domain application model in which elements can be bound separately to features. These fine-grained configurations are an input to the derivation process which uses decision models and Aspect-Oriented Programming, facilitating the reuse, adaptation and composition of model transformations.

References

[1]
T. Asikainen, T. Männistö, and T. Soininen. Kumbang: A Domain Ontology for Modelling Variability in Software Product Families. Adv. Eng. Inform., 21(1):23--40, 2007.
[2]
C. Atkinson, J. Bayer, and D. Muthig. Component-based product line development: The kobra approach. In Proc. of 1st SPLC, pages 289--309, Norwell, MA, USA, 2000.
[3]
J. Bayer, S. Gerard, Haugen, J. Mansell, B. Mller-Pedersen, J. Oldevik, P. Tessier, J. P. Thibault, and T. Widen. Consolidated Product Line Variability Modeling, pages 195--241. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2006.
[4]
J. Bézivin. On the unification power of models. Software and System Modeling, 4(2):171--188, 2005.
[5]
J. Bosch. Design and Use of Software Architectures: Adapting and Evolving a Product-Line Approach. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA, USA, 2000.
[6]
P. C. Clements. On the importance of product line scope. In Proc. of the 4th Int. Workshop on Software Product-Family Engineering, pages 70--78, London, UK, 2002.
[7]
K. Czarnecki and M. Antkiewicz. Mapping features to models: A template approach based on superimposed variants. In GPCE, volume 3676 of LNCS, pages 422--437. Springer, 2005.
[8]
K. Czarnecki and U. W. Eisenecker. Generative Programming: Methods, Tools, and Applications. ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. New York, NY, USA, 2000.
[9]
K. Czarnecki, S. Helsen, and U. Eisenecker. Staged Configuration Using Feature Models. In Proc. of the 3th SPLC, pages 266--282. LNCS 3154, 2004.
[10]
K. Czarnecki, S. Helsen, and U. W. Eisenecker. Staged configuration through specialization and multilevel configuration of feature models. Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 10(2):143--169, 2005.
[11]
K. Czarnecki and P. Kim. Cardinality-based feature modeling and constraints: A progress report. In Proc. of the International Workshop on Software Factories, 2005.
[12]
E. M. Dashofy, A. van der Hoek, and R. N. Taylor. A Comprehensive Approach for the Development of Modular Software Architecture Description Languages. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol., 14(2):199--245, 2005.
[13]
R. E. Filman, T. Elrad, S. Clarke, and M. A. Sit, editors. Aspect-Oriented Software Development. Addison-Wesley, Boston, 2005.
[14]
T. Forster, D. Muthig, and D. Pech. Understanding decision models visualization and complexity reduction of software variability. In Proc. of the 2nd VaMos'08, Essen, Germany, January 2008.
[15]
J. Greenfield, K. Short, S. Cook, and S. Kent. Software Factories: Assembling Applications with Patterns, Models, Frameworks, and Tools. Wiley, Indianapolis, US, 2004.
[16]
K. C. Kang, S. Kim, J. Lee, K. Kim, E. Shin, and M. Huh. Form: A feature-oriented reuse method with domain-specific reference architectures. Annals of Software Engineering, 5:143--168, 1998.
[17]
G. Kiczales, J. Lamping, A. Menhdhekar, C. Maeda, C. Lopes, J. M. Loingtier, and J. Irwin. Aspect-Oriented Programming, volume 1241 of LNCS. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, 1997.
[18]
N. Loughran, P. Sanchez, A. Garcia, and L. Fuentes. Language support for managing variability in architectural models. In Proc. of the 7th SC'08, volume 4954 of LNCS, pages 36--51. Springer.
[19]
M. Mezini and K. Ostermann. Variability Management with Feature-Oriented Programming and Aspects. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes, 29(6):127--136, 2004.
[20]
K. Pohl, G. Böckle, and F. van der Linden. Software Product Line Engineering: Foundations, Principles, and Techniques. Springer, Berlin, 2005.
[21]
A. L. Santos, K. Koskimies, and A. Lopes. A Model-Driven Approach to Variability Management in Product-Line Engineering. Nordic Journal of Computing, 13(3):196--213, 2006.
[22]
Software Construction Group, University of Los Andes, 2009. http://qualdev.uniandes.edu.co/wikiMain/doku.php?id=projects:md-slp_engineering.
[23]
T. Stahl, M. Voelter, and K. Czarnecki. Model-Driven Software Development: Technology, Engineering, Management. John Wiley & Sons, 2006.
[24]
P. Tessier, S. Gérard, F. Terrier, and J. M. Geib. Using Variation Propagation for Model-Driven Management of a System Family. LNCS 3714, pages 222--233, 2005.
[25]
M. Voelter and I. Groher. Product Line Implementation using Aspect-Oriented and Model-Driven Software Development. In Proc. of the 11th SPLC, pages 233--242, 2007.
[26]
D. Wagelaar. Context-driven model refinement. In MDAFA, volume 3599 of LNCS, pages 189--203. Springer, 2005.

Cited By

View all
  • (2012)Architectural variability management in multi-layer web applications through feature modelsProceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Feature-Oriented Software Development10.1145/2377816.2377821(29-36)Online publication date: 24-Sep-2012
  • (2012)A systematic review and an expert survey on capabilities supporting multi product linesInformation and Software Technology10.1016/j.infsof.2012.02.00254:8(828-852)Online publication date: 1-Aug-2012
  • (2011)A design perspective on modularityProceedings of the tenth international conference on Aspect-oriented software development10.1145/1960275.1960307(265-280)Online publication date: 21-Mar-2011

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
SPLC '09: Proceedings of the 13th International Software Product Line Conference
August 2009
319 pages

Publisher

Carnegie Mellon University

United States

Publication History

Published: 24 August 2009

Check for updates

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

SPLC '09
SPLC '09: 13th International Software Product Line Conference
August 24 - 28, 2009
California, San Francisco, USA

Acceptance Rates

SPLC '09 Paper Acceptance Rate 30 of 82 submissions, 37%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 167 of 463 submissions, 36%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 11 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2012)Architectural variability management in multi-layer web applications through feature modelsProceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Feature-Oriented Software Development10.1145/2377816.2377821(29-36)Online publication date: 24-Sep-2012
  • (2012)A systematic review and an expert survey on capabilities supporting multi product linesInformation and Software Technology10.1016/j.infsof.2012.02.00254:8(828-852)Online publication date: 1-Aug-2012
  • (2011)A design perspective on modularityProceedings of the tenth international conference on Aspect-oriented software development10.1145/1960275.1960307(265-280)Online publication date: 21-Mar-2011

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media