Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

CDDiff: Semantic Differencing for Class Diagrams

  • Conference paper
ECOOP 2011 – Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP 2011)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 6813))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Class diagrams (CDs), which specify classes and the relationships between them, are widely used for modeling the structure of object-oriented systems. As models, programs, and systems evolve over time, during the development lifecycle and beyond it, effective change management is a major challenge in software development, which has attracted much research efforts in recent years.

In this paper we present cddiff, a semantic diff operator for CDs. Unlike most existing approaches to model comparison, which compare the concrete or the abstract syntax of two given diagrams and output a list of syntactical changes or edit operations, cddiff considers the semantics of the diagrams at hand and outputs a set of diff witnesses, each of which is an object model that is possible in the first CD and is not possible in the second. We motivate the use of cddiff, formally define it, and show how it is computed. The computation is based on a reduction to Alloy. The work is implemented in a prototype Eclipse plug-in. Examples show the unique contribution of our approach to the state-of-the-art in version comparison and evolution analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alanen, M., Porres, I.: Difference and Union of Models. In: Stevens, P., Whittle, J., Booch, G. (eds.) UML 2003. LNCS, vol. 2863, pp. 2–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Alloy Anaylzer website, http://alloy.mit.edu/ (accessed April 2011)

  3. Altmanninger, K.: Models in Conflict – Towards a Semantically Enhanced Version Control System for Models. In: Giese, H. (ed.) MODELS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5002, pp. 293–304. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Anastasakis, K., Bordbar, B., Georg, G., Ray, I.: On challenges of model transformation from UML to Alloy. Software and Systems Modeling 9(1), 69–86 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Apiwattanapong, T., Orso, A., Harrold, M.J.: JDiff: A differencing technique and tool for object-oriented programs. Autom. Softw. Eng. 14(1), 3–36 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., Giacomo, G.D.: Reasoning on UML class diagrams. Artif. Intell. 168(1-2), 70–118 (2005)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Broy, M., Cengarle, M.V., Grönniger, H., Rumpe, B.: Definition of the System Model. In: Lano, K. (ed.) UML 2 Semantics and Applications, pp. 61–93. Wiley, Chichester (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cengarle, M.V., Grönniger, H., Rumpe, B.: System Model Semantics of Class Diagrams. Informatik-Bericht 2008-05, Technische Universität Braunschweig (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  9. EMF Compare, http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/emft/?project=compare (accessed April 2011)

  10. Engel, K.-D., Paige, R.F., Kolovos, D.S.: Using a Model Merging Language for Reconciling Model Versions. In: Rensink, A., Warmer, J. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4066, pp. 143–157. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Evans, A., France, R.B., Peng, S.-L.: The UML as a Formal Modeling Notation. In: Bézivin, J., Muller, P.-A. (eds.) UML 1998. LNCS, vol. 1618, pp. 336–348. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Harel, D., Rumpe, B.: Meaningful Modeling: What’s the Semantics of “Semantics”? IEEE Computer 37(10), 64–72 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Jackson, D.: Software Abstractions: Logic, Language, and Analysis. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jackson, D., Ladd, D.A.: Semantic Diff: A Tool for Summarizing the Effects of Modifications. In: ICSM, pp. 243–252. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Jouault, F., Allilaire, F., Bézivin, J., Kurtev, I.: ATL: A model transformation tool. Sci. Comput. Program. 72(1-2), 31–39 (2008)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Krahn, H., Rumpe, B., Völkel, S.: MontiCore: a framework for compositional development of domain specific languages. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer (STTT) 12(5), 353–372 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Küster, J.M., Gerth, C., Engels, G.: Dependent and Conflicting Change Operations of Process Models. In: Paige, R.F., Hartman, A., Rensink, A. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5562, pp. 158–173. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O., Rumpe, B.: A manifesto for semantic model differencing. In: Dingel, J. (ed.) MODELS 2010 Workshops. LNCS, vol. 6627, pp. 194–203. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O., Rumpe, B.: Modal object diagrams. In: Mezini, M. (ed.) ECOOP 2011. LNCS, vol. 6813, pp. 282–306. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Maraee, A., Balaban, M.: Efficient reasoning about finite satisfiability of UML class diagrams with constrained generalization sets. In: Akehurst, D.H., Vogel, R., Paige, R.F. (eds.) ECMDA-FA. LNCS, vol. 4530, pp. 17–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Massoni, T., Gheyi, R., Borba, P.: A UML Class Diagram Analyzer. In: CSDUML, pp. 143–153 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Mehra, A., Grundy, J., Hosking, J.: A generic approach to supporting diagram differencing and merging for collaborative design. In: ASE, pp. 204–213. ACM, New York (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Mens, T.: A state-of-the-art survey on software merging. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 28(5), 449–462 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. MontiCore project, http://www.monticore.org/

  25. Nejati, S., Sabetzadeh, M., Chechik, M., Easterbrook, S.M., Zave, P.: Matching and merging of statecharts specifications. In: ICSE, pp. 54–64. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ohst, D., Welle, M., Kelter, U.: Differences between versions of UML diagrams. In: Proc. ESEC / SIGSOFT FSE, pp. 227–236. ACM, New York (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  27. OMG. Unified Modeling Language (UML) Superstructure v2.1.2, http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.1.2/Superstructure/PDF (accessed April 2011)

  28. Person, S., Dwyer, M.B., Elbaum, S.G., Pasareanu, C.S.: Differential Symbolic Execution. In: SIGSOFT FSE, pp. 226–237. ACM, New York (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Rumpe, B.: Modellierung mit UML. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. SAT4J project, http://www.sat4j.org/ (accessed April 2011)

  31. Semantic diff project, http://www.se-rwth.de/materials/semdiff

  32. Shah, S.M.A., Anastasakis, K., Bordbar, B.: From UML to Alloy and Back Again. In: Ghosh, S. (ed.) MODELS 2009. LNCS, vol. 6002, pp. 158–171. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Van Der Straeten, R., Mens, T., Simmonds, J., Jonckers, V.: Using description logic to maintain consistency between UML models. In: Stevens, P., Whittle, J., Booch, G. (eds.) UML 2003. LNCS, vol. 2863, pp. 326–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Xing, Z., Stroulia, E.: Differencing logical UML models. Autom. Softw. Eng. 14(2), 215–259 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Software Engineering, RWTH Aachen University, Germany

    Shahar Maoz, Jan Oliver Ringert & Bernhard Rumpe

Authors
  1. Shahar Maoz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan Oliver Ringert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bernhard Rumpe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Software Technology group, Technische Universität, Darmstadt, Germany

    Mira Mezini

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O., Rumpe, B. (2011). CDDiff: Semantic Differencing for Class Diagrams. In: Mezini, M. (eds) ECOOP 2011 – Object-Oriented Programming. ECOOP 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6813. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22655-7_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22655-7_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-22654-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-22655-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation