Software & Systems Modeling

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 229–255 | Cite as

Eugenia: towards disciplined and automated development of GMF-based graphical model editors

  • Dimitrios S. KolovosEmail author
  • Antonio García-Domínguez
  • Louis M. Rose
  • Richard F. Paige
Regular Paper


EMF and GMF are powerful frameworks for implementing tool support for modelling languages in Eclipse. However, with power comes complexity, implementing a graphical editor for a modelling language using EMF and GMF requires developers to handcraft and maintain several detailed interconnected models through a loosely guided, labour-intensive, and error-prone process. We demonstrate how the application of metamodel annotation and model transformation techniques can help to manage the complexity of GMF and EMF and deliver significant productivity, quality, and maintainability benefits. We present Eugenia, an open-source tool that implements the proposed approach, illustrate its functionality with an example, evaluate it through an empirical study, and report on the community’s response to the tool.


Graphical modelling Model transformation Eclipse GMF 



Parts of this work were supported by the European Commission’s Seventh Framework Programme, through Grant #611125 (MONDO). Other parts of this work were supported by the doctoral scholarship PU-EPIF-FPI-C 2010-065 from the University of Cádiz and by the MoDSOA Project (TIN2011-27242) of the National Research, Development and Innovation Program of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation. The authors would also like to thank Adolfo Sanchez-Barbudo Herrera and Horacio Hoyos Rodriguez for their help with the evaluation experiments discussed in Sect. 5.


  1. 1.
    Hutchinson, J., Whittle, J., Rouncefield, M., Kristoffersen, S.: Empirical assessment of MDE in industry. In: Proceedings of ICSE, pp. 471–480. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Steinberg, D., Budinsky, F., Paternostro, M., Merks, E.: EMF: Eclipse Modelling Framework. Eclipse Series, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Professional, Reading (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wienands, C., Golm, M.: Anatomy of a visual domain-specific language project in an industrial context. In: ACM/IEEE 12th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MoDELS), pp. 453–467, Denver, CO, USA (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kolovos, D.S., Rose, L.M., Abid, S.Bin., Paige, R.F., Polack, Fiona A.C., Botterweck, G.: Taming EMF and GMF using model transformation. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems: Part I, MODELS’10, pp. 211–225. Springer, Berlin (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kolovos, D.S., Paige, R.F., Polack, F.A.C.: The epsilon transformation language. In: Proceedings of 1st International Conference on Model Transformation (ICMT), Zurich, Switzerland (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eclipse Foundation. Epsilon modeling GMT component.
  7. 7.
    Kolovos, D.S., Paige, R.F., Polack, F.A.C.: The epsilon object language. In: Proceedings of European Conference in Model Driven Architecture (EC-MDA) 2006, Volume 4066 of LNCS, pp. 128–142, Bilbao, Spain (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    El Kouhen, A., Dumoulin, C., Gerard, S., Boulet, P.: Evaluation of modeling tools adaptation. Technical report, Laboratoire d’Intégration des Systèmes et des Technologies - LIST, LIFL - DART - LIFL - DART, Laboratoire d’Informatique Fondamentale de Lille - LIFL, LIFL - DART/Émeraude (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baetens, N.: Comparing graphical DSL editors: AToM3, GMF, MetaEdit+. Technical report, University of Antwerp (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Seehusen, F., Stølen, K.: An evaluation of the graphical modeling framework (GMF) based on the development of the CORAS tool. In: Jordi, C., Eelco, V. (eds.) Theory and Practice of Model Transformations, Volume 6707 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 152–166. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sun, Y., Wienands, C., Felser, M.: Applying model-driven design and development to distributed time-triggered systems. In: Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Engineering and Meta-Engineering (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dayibas, O., Oguztuzun, H.: Kutulu: A domain-specific language for feature-driven product derivation. In: Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), 2012 IEEE 36th Annual, pp. 105–110 (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Demirli, E., Tekinerdogan, B.: Save: software architecture environment for modeling views. In: 2011 9th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA), pp. 355–358 (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Di Ruscio, D., Malavolta, I., Muccini, H., Pelliccione, P., Pierantonio, A.: Developing next generation ADLs through MDE techniques. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering—Volume 1, ICSE ’10, pp. 85–94. ACM, New York, NY (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pena, C., Villalobos, J.: An MDE approach to design enterprise architecture viewpoints. In: 2010 IEEE 12th Conference on Commerce and Enterprise Computing (CEC), pp. 80–87 (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sun, Y., Gray, J., Bulheller, K., Baillou, N.: A model-driven approach to support engineering changes in industrial robotics software. In: France, R.B., Kazmeier, J., Breu, R., Atkinson, C. (eds.) Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, Volume 7590 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 368–382. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Noguero, A., Calvo, I.: FTT-Modeler: a support tool for FTT-CORBA. In: 2012 7th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), pp. 1–6 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Calvillo, J., Román, I., Roa, L.M.: Empowering citizens with access control mechanisms to their personal health resources. Int. J. Med. Inform. 82(1), 58–72 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Frantz, R.Z., Reina Quintero, A.M., Corchuelo, R.: A domain specific language to design enterprise application integration solutions. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 20(02), 143–176 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    García, J., García, F.O., Pelechano, V., Vallecillo, A., Vara, J.M., Vicente-Chicote, C. (eds).: Desarrollo de software dirigido por modelos: conceptos, métodos y herramientas. Ra-Ma (2013)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Williams, J.R., Poulding, S., Rose, L.M., Paige, R.F., Polack, F.A.C.: Identifying Desirable Game Character Behaviours Through the Application of Evolutionary Algorithms to Model-Driven Engineering Metamodels, vol. 6956. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    García-Domínguez, A., Kolovos, D.S., Rose, L.M., Paige, R.F.: Inmaculada Medina-Bulo. EUnit: a unit testing framework for model management tasks. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, MODELS’11, pp. 395–409. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schnepel, E.: GenGMF: efficient editor development for large meta models using the graphical modelling framework. In: Proceedings of special interest group on model-driven software engineering (SIG-MDSE) (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Temate, S., Broto, L., Tchana, A., Hagimont, D.: A high level approach for generating model’s graphical editors. In: 2011 Eighth International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations (ITNG), pp. 743–749 (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    MetaCase. Meta-Edit+.
  26. 26.
    Generic Modeling Environment.
  27. 27.
    De Lara, J., Vangheluwe, H.: Using AToM3 as a meta-CASE tool. In: Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, pp. 642–649, Ciudad Real - Spain (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dimitrios S. Kolovos
    • 1
    Email author
  • Antonio García-Domínguez
    • 2
  • Louis M. Rose
    • 1
  • Richard F. Paige
    • 1
  1. 1.University of YorkYorkUK
  2. 2.University of CádizCádizSpain

Personalised recommendations