Inconsistency management for multiple-view software development environments

Grundy, John; Hosking, John; Mugridge, Warwick B.

doi:10.1109/32.730545

Cited by 108 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most progress has been on the detecting of inconsistencies [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42] because an inconsistency is indicative of an incomplete or incorrect change propagation. There also have been attempts in generating fixes for inconsistencies [43], [44], [37] where the "fixes" could be seen analogous to propagated changes.…”

Section: Collaboration Awarenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards collaboration-centric pattern-based software development support

Dorn

Egyed

2013

2013 6th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Software engineering activities tend to be loosely coupled to allow for flexibly reacting to unforeseen development complexity, requirements changes, and progress delays. This flexibility comes a the price of hidden dependencies among design and code artifacts that make it difficult or even impossible to assess change impact. Incorrect change propagation subsequently results in costly errors. This position paper proposes a novel approach based on monitoring engineering activities for subsequent high-level pattern detection. Patterns of (i) collaboration structures, (ii) temporal action sequences, and (iii) artifact consistency constraints serve as input to recommendation and automatic reconfiguration algorithms for ultimately avoiding and correcting artifact inconsistencies.

show abstract

Section: Collaboration Awarenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards collaboration-centric pattern-based software development support

Dorn

Egyed

2013

2013 6th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A large number of approaches address the problem of multi-viewpoint integration and synchronization [7]. We have works on synchronizing artifacts in software engineering, mostly influenced by original works on multi-view consistency [11,13] using a generic representation of modifications and relying on users to write code to handle each type of modification in each type of view. This idea influenced later efforts on model synchronization frameworks in general [19,20] and in particular bi-directional model transformations [33,37].…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Viewpoint Co-evolution through Coarse-Grained Changes and Coupled Transformations

Wimmer

Moreno

Vallecillo

2012

Objects, Models, Components, Patterns

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Multi-viewpoint modeling is an effective technique to deal with the ever-growing complexity of large-scale systems. The evolution of multi-viewpoint system specifications is currently accomplished in terms of fine-grained atomic changes. Apart from being a very low-level and cumbersome strategy, it is also quite unnatural to system modelers, who think of model evolution in terms of coarse-grained high-level changes. In order to bridge this gap, we propose an approach to formally express and manipulate viewpoint changes in a high-level fashion, by structuring atomic changes into coarse-grained composite ones. These can also be used to formally define reconciling operations to adapt dependent views, using coupled transformations. We introduce a modeling language based on graph transformations and Maude for expressing both, the coarse-grained changes and the coupled transformations that propagate them to reestablish global consistency. We demonstrate the applicability of the approach by its application in the context of RM-ODP.

show abstract

“…A large number of approaches in other disciplines address the problem of multi-viewpoint synchronization [3,5,6,7,9,10,19]. All these approaches have in common that they consider only atomic changes when reconciling models to satisfy again given modeling language constraints.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%