ECOOP 2001: 4th Workshop on
Object-Oriented Architectural Evolution
University Eötvös Loránd, Budapest, Hungary
Monday, August 22, 2001
Additional information
INTRODUCTION
This workshop is the fourth in a series of workshops in the area of software
architecture and its evolution, which took place during ECOOP 1998, ECOOP 1999 and
ECOOP 2000. Previous workshops have proved very successful and stimulating,
culminating in reports that contained novel and exciting views on what software
architecture is, or should be, and how architectural issues may be approached
from fresh perspectives. Past workshops also incorporated relevant experience
reports and suggestions for future research in the area of evolving software
architectures, especially object-oriented ones.
All information about the ECOOP workshop series on object-oriented architectural evolution
can be found at prog.vub.ac.be/OOAE/.
OPEN QUESTIONS
The following questions were posed to the participants before the workshop.
They are subdivided into 5 categories:
- Questions related to domain analysis:
- What is the precise relationship between domain modelling and architectural design/modelling?
- How can domain analysis be used to derive a better (i.e. more stable) software architecture?
- Can we predict certain types of architectural evolution based on a given domain analysis? Which ones? How?
- Questions concerning the use of multiple architectural views:
- Should there be a predefined set of architectural views, or do the kinds of views depend on the problem domain?
- Is there a relationship between the different architectural views? Should we allow for explicit constraints between the views? How? Why (not)?
- Is there a correspondence between the architectural views and the architectural styles that can be used in those views?
- Questions concerning the layered approach:
- How should the different layers be related? Should we put explicit constraints between them? How?
- Should there be a limited set of layers depending on the architectural view taken, or can there be an unlimited number of layers?
- How can layering ease the transition from a software architecture to the
(object-oriented) software implementation?
- (How) can other architectural styles than a layered one be used to (i) facilitate evolution; (ii) ease the transition to the software implementation?
- Impact of multi-layered view approach on architectural evolution:
- How can views be used to guide/constrain/facilitate changes to the architecture and the implementation?
- Does it make sense to distinguish inter-view, intra-view, inter-layer and intra-layer evolution? What is the meaning of this?
- Can a multi-layered-view approach be beneficial for checking or enforcing the conformance of a software implementation to its architecture? Does it become simpler to synchronise an architecture and its corresponding implementation?
- Applicability of existing techniques:
- Where do existing evolution approaches like reverse engineering, architectural recovery, restructuring, refactoring, architectural reconfiguration fit in? Can they be used in the above approach? How can they benefit from the ideas introduced above?
- Can object-oriented techniques such as design patterns, frameworks and inheritance be used to facilitate evolution, or to ease the transition from a software architecture to a software implementation?
- How can one determine whether (part of) a given software architecture is stable?
WORKSHOP
Submission
Submission of position papers is now closed.
The list of accepted submissions
can be found here.
A contribution matrix which summarises all contributions at a glance can be found here.
Submissions from the following persons were accepted:
- Serge Demeyer, University of Antwerp, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Antwerp, BELGIUM.
- Palle Nowack and Lars Bendix, Aalborg University & University of Southern Denmark, DENMARK.
[Presentation slides in pdf format]
- Harald Störrle, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Institut für Informatik/PST, München, GERMANY
- Stephen Cook and Rachel Harrison and Brian Ritchie, University of Reading,
Applied Software Engineering Research Group, School of Computer Science, Cybernetics and Electronic Engineering,
Reading, UNITED KINGDOM.
[Presentation slides in pdf format]
- Janis Osis, Riga Technical University, Institute of Applied Computer Systems, Riga, LATVIA.
- Luís Andrade and Georgios Koutsoukos and Joăo Gouveia and José Luiz Fiadeiro
and Michel Wermelinger, Oblog Software SA & Universidade de Lisboa & Universidade Nova de Lisboa,
Dep. de Informática, Lisboa, PORTUGAL.
- Jean-Pierre Briot and Frédéric Peschanski, Université Paris 6 - CNRS,
Laboratoire d'Informatique de Paris 6 (LIP6), Paris, FRANCE.
- Christian Wege, DaimlerChrysler AG, GERMANY.
[See also: "Diagnosing evolution in test-infected code"]
[See also: "System Lines - Elements of the Software Product Lines Approach for the
Construction of Corporate Information Systems"]
- Alessandro Maccari, Nokia Research Center, Software Architectures Group, FINLAND
- Albertina Lourenci and Joao Antonio Zuffo, Politechnic School, University of Sao Paulo, BRAZIL.
[See also: "An evolutive architecture reasons as a semiotic, hermeneutic and autopoietic entity"]
During the workshop
A tentative workshop schedule is available.
After a general introduction, two warm-up presentations have been given, chosen
according to the bias of the organisers:
After these presentations, a set of questions were discussed based on the answers gathered before the workshop.
Workshop Report
As per the tradition with past ECOOP workshops, a synopsis of the
workshop's discussions, as well as the convergences of view taken place
during the workshop, have been collated into a technical report. As per ECOOP tradition, this synopsis is published by Springer-Verlag in a
volume of Lecture Notes in Computer Science containing the ECOOP 2001 Workshop Reader.
ORGANIZERS
PREVIOUS WORKSHOPS
RELEVANT LITERATURE
An extensive list of relevant literature and web sites can be found in the ECOOP 2000 Workshop Synthesis, which is accessible
via prog.vub.ac.be/OOAE/ECOOP2000/ECOOP2000-OOAE.html.
The following references are also relevant.
- S. Brand.
How Buildings Learn.
Phoenix Ltd., ISBN 0-75380-0500, 1994.
- P. Kruchten.
The 4+1 View Model of Architecture.
IEEE Software 12(6): 42-50, 1995.
- K. Mens, R. Wuyts.
Declaratively Codifying Software Architectures Using Virtual Software Classifications.
Proc. TOOLS Europe '99, pp. 33-45, IEEE Computer Society Press, 1999.
- K. Mens.
Automating Architectural Conformance Checking by means of Logic Meta Programming.
PhD Thesis, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, October 2000.
- G.C. Murphy, D.Notkin, K. Sullivan
Software Reflexion Models: Bridging the Gap Between Source and High-Level Models.
Proc. Third ACM SIGSOFT Symp. Foundations of Software Engineering, pp. 18-28, ACM Press, July 1996.
- T. Richner, S. Ducasse.
Recovering High-Level Views of Object-Oriented Applications from Static and Dynamic Information.
Proc. Int. Conf. Softw. Maintenance, pp. 13-22, Hongji Yang and Lee White (Eds.), IEEE Computer Society Press, September 1999.
This workshop is an offical activity of the Scientific Research Network on "Foundations of Software Evolution",
and is partially financed by the Fund for Scientific Research - Flanders (Belgium).