New Methods in Software Product Line Development

Krueger, Charles W.

doi:10.1109/spline.2006.1691581

Cited by 45 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to the related work cited above, several other approaches and publications are dealing with a hierarchical decomposition of large-scale product lines and their variability representations [vO04,BN09,Kru06]. To the best of our knowledge, none of these provide support for automatically transforming logic constraints from one variability representation to another.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feature link propagation across variability representations with Isabelle/HOL

Kammüller

Rein

Reiser

2010

Proceedings of the 2010 ICSE Workshop on Product Line Approaches in Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When dealing with highly complex product lines it is usually indispensable to somehow subdivide the overall product line into several smaller, subordinate product lines and to define orthogonal views on the line's variability tailored to particular purposes, such as end-customer configuration. In this article we report on an ongoing research effort for dealing with feature links, i.e. logical constraints between features, in such a setting, by propagating such logical constraints defined in lower-level product lines to a higher level or from one view to another.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feature link propagation across variability representations with Isabelle/HOL

Kammüller

Rein

Reiser

2010

Proceedings of the 2010 ICSE Workshop on Product Line Approaches in Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• Finally, we can use any other implementation strategy, including runtime variability [44], sophisticated metaprogramming systems [26,31], and configuration management systems [10,32]. For most of these implementation mechanisms, no efficient means to type check all configurations is available yet.…”

Section: Abstraction From Variability Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Subsequently, we perform composition checks for all configurations, equivalent to linker checks in C. We encode expensive compatibility checks and type checks as Boolean satisfiability problems, building on prior work on variability-aware analysis [18,50,28,3,15]. We provide a full open-source implementation as part of our TypeChef project and type check the entire Busybox product line with 811 compile-time configuration options (and, thus, more potential configurations than the estimated number of atoms in the universe [32]) to demonstrate practicality. Modularity allows us to type check each of Busybox's 522 files in parallel.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A variability-aware module system

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Module systems enable a divide and conquer strategy to software development. To implement compile-time variability in software product lines, modules can be composed in different combinations. However, this way variability dictates a dominant decomposition. Instead, we introduce a variability-aware module system that supports compile-time variability inside a module and its interface. This way, each module can be considered a product line that can be type checked in isolation. Variability can crosscut multiple modules. The module system breaks with the antimodular tradition of a global variability model in product-line development and provides a path toward software ecosystems and product lines of product lines developed in an open fashion. We discuss the design and implementation of such a module system on a core calculus and provide an implementation for C, which we use to type check the open source product line Busybox with 811 compile-time options.

show abstract

“…Product configuration or software mass customization [26,27] originates from the idea that product derivation activities should be based on the parameterization and/or composition of the SPL core assets rather than focusing on how the individual products can be obtained. Most of these approaches base their decision models on feature models originally proposed by Kang et al [20].…”

Section: Product Derivation By Configurationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconciling Automation and Flexibility in Product Derivation

Perrouin

Klein

Guelfi

et al. 2008

2008 12th International Software Product Line Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Product derivation, i.e. reusing core assets to build products, did not receive sufficient attention from the productline community, yielding a frustrating situation. On the one hand, automated product derivation approaches are inflexible; they do not allow products meeting unforeseen, customer-specific, requirements. On the other hand, approaches that consider this issue do not provide adequate methodological guidelines nor automated support.This paper proposes an integrated product derivation approach reconciling the two views to offer both flexibility and automation. First, we perform a pre-configuration of the product by selecting desired features in a generic feature model and automatically composing their related product-line core assets. Then, we adapt the pre-configured product to its customer-specific requirements via derivation primitives combined by product engineers and controlled by constraints that flexibly set product line boundaries. Our process is supported by the Kermeta metamodeling environment and illustrated through an example.

show abstract

New Methods in Software Product Line Development

Cited by 45 publications

References 1 publication

Feature link propagation across variability representations with Isabelle/HOL

Feature link propagation across variability representations with Isabelle/HOL

A variability-aware module system

Reconciling Automation and Flexibility in Product Derivation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About