2012
DOI: 10.1134/s0361768812050052
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Backward compatibility of software interfaces: Steps towards automatic verification

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…4: Difference between DepOwl and existing tools. This figure includes source-code level (1,2) and binary level (3,4) compatibility between libraries and applications (2,3), or cross different library versions (1,4). Existing tools focus on (1,2,4), while DepOwl addresses (3).…”
Section: M O T I V a T I O N A N D Ov E R V Ie W O F Depowlmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…4: Difference between DepOwl and existing tools. This figure includes source-code level (1,2) and binary level (3,4) compatibility between libraries and applications (2,3), or cross different library versions (1,4). Existing tools focus on (1,2,4), while DepOwl addresses (3).…”
Section: M O T I V a T I O N A N D Ov E R V Ie W O F Depowlmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mezzetti et al [5] proposed type regression testing to determine whether a library update affects its public interfaces. Ponomarenko et al [2] presented a new method for automatic detection of backward compatibility problems at the binary level. Wu et al [3] proposed a hybrid approach to identify framework evolution rules.…”
Section: II R E L a T E D W O R K Smentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, the technological limitations include the potential obstacles encountered when bidirectionally integrating the local systems with the central one. Moreover, backward compatibility of newer versions of the system with older ones, as described in scientific literature (Ponomarenko & Rubanov, 2012), should be considered. It is also recommended to determine the frequency of software updates and their technical requirements because updates extending functionality and based on full system integration often require support by more modern hardware generations.…”
Section: The Proposition Of Enhancementsmentioning
confidence: 99%