A methodology for evaluating environments

Weiderman, Nelson; Habermann, A. N.; Borger, Mark; Klein, Mark

doi:10.1145/24208.24231

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One problem relates to how software environments should be evaluated: approaches have ranged from "single observation" studies [WHBK86] to more systematic approaches [SeI85]. Another problem is that there has been no unifying system to support the processes of specifying, collecting, and analyzing software metrics.…”

Section: Measurement and Evaluation Of Environmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Next Generation Software Environments: Principles, Problems, and Research Directions

Taylor¹,

Baker²,

Belz³

et al. 1987

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Measurement and Evaluation Of Environmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Next Generation Software Environments: Principles, Problems, and Research Directions

Taylor¹,

Baker²,

Belz³

et al. 1987

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Our experience witk this approach has lead us to believe that a more rigor. ous evaluation methodology, for instance t h e methodology proposed in [9], might provide bettei feedback. To follow this up, one of our current effort!…”

Section: Our Development Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supporting the programmer of a rule based language

Fickas

1987

Expert Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we take up the plight of the programmer of a rule basedlanguage. Our focus is on the type of development environment that is most supportive of such programmes. Our view will be that programming is programming, whether it be with a rule based, finctional or imperative language. While it is true that rule based languages have strong links to the Expert Systems fwld, our discussion in this paper has less to do with 'expert systems' per se', and more to do with the view of rule based languages as yet another computational paradigm, often included under the same roof with non-rule-based languages. Just as programming environment research has progressed for non-rule-based languages, we would like to build more powerful environments in the rule based world as well. W e report here onan attempt to build such an environment.2 STEPHEN FICKAS "Research in rule learning, which often starts with, 'buggy' rule and attempts to refine it, provides related perspective to the problem [29]. Expert Systems, May 1987. VoZ. 4, No. 2. , . Expert Systems and Their Applications, 1985. 86 ~ ~~_ _ Expert Systems, May 1987. Vol. 4, No. 2.

show abstract

“…In the past, a software development environment consisted of a compiler for the language being used and a few ad hoc tools. Today, to achieve the productivity and quality demanded by the Department of Defense (DoD), the environment is expected to encompass an integrated set of tools (see Figure 1) to support the complete development cycle (requirements, design, code, test, document, maintenance) (Reed, 1985;Wiederman et al, 1986;SIGSOFT, 1988SIGSOFT, -1989.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An approach for developing an integrated modelling environment: A case investigation

Rine

1991

J. Softw. Maint: Res. Pract.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research on software development environments (SDE) and computer‐aided software engineering (CASE) have not addressed the issue of multiple environments. This paper presents an approach for developing an integrated modelling environment (IME) that supports the maintenance of software environment models in software engineering. The approach uses the notion of a composite software development environment maintaining multiple software development environments. The composite is specified by analysing and identifying common features from other environments. These other environments include various government‐supported efforts. The idea of a common software development environment may be supported in part by several different international standards or technical approaches (e.g. CAIS, CAIS‐A, PCTE, ALMA/metasystems, object‐oriented systems, and so forth). Some of these ways are outlined in the paper. An analysis of them in case study form is presented.

show abstract

A methodology for evaluating environments

Cited by 12 publications

References 2 publications

Next Generation Software Environments: Principles, Problems, and Research Directions

Next Generation Software Environments: Principles, Problems, and Research Directions

Supporting the programmer of a rule based language

An approach for developing an integrated modelling environment: A case investigation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About