Chiron-1

Taylor, Richard N.; Nies, Kari; Bolcer, Gregory Alan; MacFarlane, Craig A.; Anderson, Kenneth M.; Johnson, Gregory F.

doi:10.1145/210181.210182

Cited by 24 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The original Petri net tool was built in Ada using the Chiron-1 GUI management system as its implementation substrate [40]. Analysis of the tool's architecture revealed that it adhered to Chiron-1's strict clientserver separation, where the client, implemented in Ada, provided the application's logic and GUI, while the server, implemented in C++, was in charge of rendering the application on the screen.…”

Section: Petri Net Simulatormentioning

confidence: 99%

Using software evolution to focus architectural recovery

Medvidović

Jakobac

2006

Autom Software Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ideally, a software project commences with requirements gathering and specification, reaches its major milestone with system implementation and delivery, and then continues, possibly indefinitely, into an operation and maintenance phase. The software system's architecture is in many ways the linchpin of this process: it is supposed to be an effective reification of the system's technical requirements and to be faithfully reflected in the system's implementation. Furthermore, the architecture is meant to guide system evolution, while also being updated in the process. However, in reality developers frequently deviate from the architecture, causing architectural erosion, a phenomenon in which the initial, "as documented" architecture of an application is (arbitrarily) modified to the point where its key properties no longer hold. Architectural recovery is a process frequently used to cope with architectural erosion whereby the current, "as implemented" architecture of a software system is extracted from the system's implementation. In this paper we propose a light-weight approach to architectural recovery, called Focus, which has three unique facets. First, Focus uses a system's evolution requirements to isolate and incrementally recover only the fragment of the system's architecture affected by the evolution. In this manner, Focus allows engineers to direct their primary attention to the part of the system that is immediately impacted by the desired change; subsequent changes will incrementally uncover additional parts of the system's architecture. Secondly, in addition to software components, which are the usual target of existing recovery approaches, Focus also recovers the key architectural notions of software connector and architectural style. Finally, Focus does not only recover a system's architecture, but may in fact rearchitect the system. We have applied and evaluated Focus in the context of several off-the-shelf applications and architectural styles to date. We discuss its key strengths and point out several open issues that will frame our future work.

show abstract

Section: Petri Net Simulatormentioning

confidence: 99%

Using software evolution to focus architectural recovery

Medvidović

Jakobac

2006

Autom Software Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[TNB+95] described the Chiron-1 user interface system. This system demonstrated key techniques that enable a strict separation of an application from its user interface.…”

Section: Hyperwarementioning

confidence: 99%

Research in Advanced Environments

Taylor¹,

Richardson²,

Selby³

et al. 2001

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of informetion, including suggestions for reducing this burden, ObjectiveThe fundamental objective of Arcadia was to develop technically rich solutions across the breadth of the problem (developer support, product architectures, tool technologies) that are technically compatible, functionally comprehensive, and mutually reinforcing.Active process support was developed to help human developers, including non-technical managers, coordinate their activities while integrating commercial project planning tools. Analysis and testing tools were developed to provide high assurance in software, through provision of pre-run-time analyses, test case development, test result checking, and test process management tools. Powerful program analysis tools were developed which enable early detection of subtle coordination errors in concurrent systems composed of heterogeneous parts. Evolvable software architectures, first in the domain of user interface software, were developed to enable a more component-based software economy. World-Wide-Web and hypermedia technology were developed to foster easy information access, connections between software artifacts, and human understanding of complex systems. ApproachProcedurally, the Arcadia project's approach was one of iteration, prototyping, and integration. Emphasis was placed on identification of principles that transcend idiosyncratic implementations. The integrating environment conceptual architecture was based on a set of coherent principles iteratively refined through experience with the prototype component implementations. Specific technology transition efforts with various consumers were used to validate the technology in actual practice situations. Separate technologies were first prototyped, then pair-wise integrations performed, then multi-way integrations.The work in distributed, team-oriented software development was focused on determining effective ways of explicitly describing team-based activities, determining which parts of those activities could best be supported by automated tools, and technologies were developed to perform that automation. A critical aspect of this work was developing an effective basis for management of projects over the net; consequently, a distributed architecture implemented in Java was adopted. In a nutshell, this was research targeted at the intersection of software process research and computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW)/Groupware research. Specific technical innovation came from support for non-technical users, techniques supporting two-way integration with commercial project planning and communication tools, and support for reuse and adaptation of process fragments.

show abstract

“…With two exceptions, the examples in this section make use of Chiron-1 [34] as a testbed. This allowed the rapid exploration of several key C2 concepts without having to devote a large development effort on support infrastructure.…”

Section: Examples and Trial Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An excellent discussion of the benefits of implicit invocation can be found in [32,33], as embodied in their mediators concept. Chiron-1 [34], through its transmission of abstract data type modification events to potentially reactive artists, also supports implicit invocation. This is similar to VisualWorks [11], a Smalltalk GUI library based on the Model-View-Controller paradigm [15], where the model broadcasts change of state notifications to views and controllers.…”

Section: A Implicit Invocationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is designed to support the particular needs of applications that have a graphical user interface aspect, but the style clearly has the potential for supporting other types of applications. This style draws its key ideas from many sources, including the styles mentioned above, as well as specific experience with the Chiron-1 user interface development system [14,34]. In the following exposition, the style is referred to as the Chiron-2, or C2, style.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A component- and message-based architectural style for GUI software

Taylor

Medvidović

Anderson

et al. 1995

Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Software Engineering - ICSE '95

Self Cite

236

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

--While a large fraction of application code is devoted to graphical user interface (GUI) functions, support for reuse in this domain has largely been confined to the creation of GUI toolkits ("widgets"). We present a novel architectural style directed at supporting larger grain reuse and flexible system composition. Moreover, the style supports design of distributed, concurrent applications. Asynchronous notification messages and asynchronous request messages are the sole basis for inter-component communication. A key aspect of the style is that components are not built with any dependencies on what typically would be considered lower-level components, such as user interface toolkits. Indeed, all components are oblivious to the existence of any components to which notification messages are sent. While our focus has been on applications involving graphical user interfaces, the style has the potential for broader applicability. Several trial applications using the style are described.

show abstract

Chiron-1

Cited by 24 publications

References 16 publications

Using software evolution to focus architectural recovery

Using software evolution to focus architectural recovery

Research in Advanced Environments

A component- and message-based architectural style for GUI software

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About