Directives for Composing Aspect-Oriented Design Class Models

  • Y. R. Reddy
  • S. Ghosh
  • R. B. France
  • G. Straw
  • J. M. Bieman
  • N. McEachen
  • E. Song
  • G. Georg
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3880)

Abstract

An aspect-oriented design model consists of a set of aspect models and a primary model. Each aspect model describes a feature that crosscuts elements in the primary model. Aspect and primary models are composed to obtain an integrated design view. In this paper we describe a composition approach that utilizes a merging algorithm and composition directives. Composition directives are used when the default merging algorithm is known or expected to yield incorrect models. Our prototype tool supports default class diagram composition.

Keywords

Aspect-oriented modeling Composition directives KerMeta Metamodel EMOF Signature UML 

References

  1. 1.
    France, R.B., Ray, I., Georg, G., Ghosh, S.: An aspect-oriented approach to design modeling. IEE Proceedings - Software, Special Issue on Early Aspects: Aspect-Oriented Requirements Engineering and Architecture Design 151, 173–185 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    The Object Management Group (OMG): Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure. Version 2.0, Final Adopted Specification (2003), http://www.omg.org
  3. 3.
    Straw, G., Georg, G., Song, E.J., Ghosh, S., France, R.B., Bieman, J.M.: Model composition directives. In: Baar, T., Strohmeier, A., Moreira, A., Mellor, S.J. (eds.) UML 2004. LNCS, vol. 3273, pp. 84–97. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Reddy, R., France, R.B., Ghosh, S., Fleury, F., Baudry, B.: Model composition - a signature based approach. In: Proceedings Aspect Oriented Modeling workshop held with MODELS/UML 2005, Montego Bay, Jamaica (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Song, E., Reddy, R., France, R., Ray, I., Georg, G., Alexander, R.: Verifiable composition of access control and application features. In: SACMAT 2005: Proceedings of the tenth ACM symposium on Access control models and technologies, pp. 120–129. ACM Press, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Georg, G., Ray, I., France, R.: Using Aspects to Design a Secure System. In: Proceedings of the Interational Conference on Engineering Complex Computing Systems (ICECCS 2002), pp. 117–126. ACM, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    TRISKELL: The KerMeta Project home page (2005), http://www.kermeta.org
  8. 8.
    OMG adopted specification ptc/03-10-04: The Meta Object Facility (MOF) Core Specification. Version 2.0, http://www.omg.org
  9. 9.
    Muller, P., Fleury, F., Jézéquel, J.: Weaving executability into object-oriented meta-languages. In: Proceedings of MODELS/UML 2005, Montego Bay, Jamaica (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reddy, Y.R., France, R.B., Georg, G.: An aspect-based approach to modeling and analyzing dependability features. Technical Report CS04 - 109, Colorado State University (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    France, R., Georg, G.: Modeling fault tolerant concerns using aspects. Technical Report 02-102, Computer Science Department, Colorado State University (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Georg, G., France, R.B., Ray, I.: Composing aspect models. In: 4th AOSD Modeling with UML workshop, San Francisco, CA (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Clarke, S.: Extending Standard UML with Model Composition Semantics. Science of Computer Programming 44, 71–100 (2002)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Araujo, J., Coutinho, P.: Identifying aspectual use cases using a viewpoint-oriented requirements method. In: Early Aspects 2003: Aspect Oriented Requirements Engineering and Architecture Design, Workshop of the 2nd Intl. Conference on Aspect-Oriented Software Development, Boston, MA (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Clarke, S., Walker, R.J.: Composition Patterns: An approach to desigining reusable aspects. In: Proc. of 23rd Intl. Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), Toronto, Canada, pp. 5–14 (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gray, J., Bapty, T., Neema, S., Tuck, J.: Handling crosscutting constraints in domain-specific modeling. Communications of the ACM 44, 87–93 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grundy, J.C.: Multi-perspective specification, design and implementation of software components using aspects. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering 10(6), 713–734 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jacobson, I.: Case for Aspects - Part I. Software Development Magazine, 32–37 (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rashid, A., Sawyer, P., Moreira, A., Araujo, J.: Early aspects: A model for aspect-oriented requirements engineering. In: IEEE Joint Intl. Conference on Requirements Engineering, Essen, Germany, pp. 199–202 (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Aksit, M., Wakita, K., Bosch, J., Bergmans, L., Yonezawa, A.: Abstracting Object Interactions Using Composition Filters. In: Guerraoui, R., Nierstrasz, O., Riveill, M. (eds.) ECOOP-WS 1993. LNCS, vol. 791, pp. 152–184. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Harrison, W., Ossher, H., Tarr, P.: Asymmetrically vs. symmetrically organized paradigms for software composition. Technical report, IBM - RC22685 (W0212-147) (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kiczales, G., Lamping, J., Mendhekar, A., Maeda, C., Lopes, C., Loingtier, J., Irwin, J.: Aspect-oriented programming. In: Aksit, M., Matsuoka, S. (eds.) ECOOP 1997. LNCS, vol. 1241, pp. 220–242. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nuseibeh, B., Kramer, J., Finkelstein, A.: A framework for expressing the relationships between multiple views in requirements specification. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 20, 760–773 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Harrison, W., Ossher, H.: Subject oriented programming (a critique of pure objects). In: OOPSLA 1993: Proc. of the 8th Annual Conference on Object-Oriented Programming: Systems, Languages, and Applications, Washington, D.C., pp. 411–428 (1993)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ossher, H., Kaplan, M., Katz, A., Harrison, W., Kruskal, V.: Specifying subject-oriented composition. Theory and Practice of Object Systems 2(3), 179–202 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tarr, P., Ossher, H., Harrison, W., Sutton, S.: N degrees of separation: Multi-dimensional separation of concerns. In: ICSE 1999: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 107–119 (1999)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ray, I., Li, N., Kim, D.K., France, R.: Using parameterized UML to specify and compose access control models. In: IICIS 2003: Proceedings of Sixth IFIP TC-11 WG 11.5 Working Conference on Integrity and Internal Control in Information Systems (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chitchyan, R., Rashid, A., Sawyer, P., Garcia, A., Alarcon, M., Bakker, J., Tekinerdogan, B., Clarke, S., Jackson, A.: Survey of aspect-oriented analysis and design approaches. Technical Report ULANC-9, AOSD - Europe (2005)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Baniassad, E., Clarke, S.: Theme: An approach for aspect-oriented analysis and design. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 158–167 (2004)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Clarke, S., Walker, R.J.: Composition patterns: An approach to designing reusable aspects. In: ICSE: The 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering, Toronto, Canada (2001)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Brito, I., Moreira, A.: Towards a composition process for aspect-oriented requirements. In: Proceedings of the Early-Aspects Workshop at AOSD 2002 (2002)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kiczales, G., Lamping, J., Mendhekar, A., Maeda, C., Lopes, C.V., Loingtier, J.-M., Irwin, J.: Aspect-Oriented Programming. In: Aksit, M., Matsuoka, S. (eds.) ECOOP 1997. LNCS, vol. 1241, pp. 220–242. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kienzle, J., Yu, Y., Xiong, J.: On composition and reuse of aspects. In: Proceedings of the Foundations of Aspect-Oriented Languages Workshop, Boston, MA, USA (2003)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Aldawud, O., Bader, A., Elrad, T.: Weaving with statecharts. In: Workshop on Aspect-Oriented Modeling (held with AOSD 2002), Enschede, Netherlands (2002)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ray, I., France, R., Li, N., Georg, G.: An aspect-based approach to modeling access control concerns. Information and Software Technology 40, 557–633 (2004)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ray, I., Li, N., France, R., Kim, D.K.: Using UML to visualize role-based access control constraints. In: SACMAT: Proceedings of the Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies, pp. 31–40 (2004)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Georg, G., France, R., Ray, I.: Designing High Integrity Systems using Aspects. In: IICIS 2002: Proceedings of the Fifth IFIP TC-11 WG 11.5 Working Conference on Integrity and Internal Control in Information Systems, Bonn, Germany (2002)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Georg, G., France, R., Ray, I.: An Aspect-Based Approach to Modeling Security Concerns. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Critical Systems Development with UML, Dresden, Germany (2002)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Homb, S.H., Georg, G., France, R., Bieman, J., Jurjens, J.: Cost-benefit trade-off analysis using bbn for aspect-oriented risk-driven development. In: ICECCS: Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Y. R. Reddy
    • 1
  • S. Ghosh
    • 1
  • R. B. France
    • 1
  • G. Straw
    • 1
  • J. M. Bieman
    • 1
  • N. McEachen
    • 1
  • E. Song
    • 1
  • G. Georg
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentColorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA

Personalised recommendations