Advertisement

Reuse with Software Components - A Survey of Industrial State of Practice

  • Rikard Land
  • Daniel Sundmark
  • Frank Lüders
  • Iva Krasteva
  • Adnan Causevic
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5791)

Abstract

Software is often built from pre-existing, reusable components, but there is a lack of knowledge regarding how efficient this is in practice. In this paper we therefore present qualitative results from an industrial survey on current practices and preferences, highlighting differences and similarities between development with reusable components, development without reusable components, and development of components for reuse. Component reuse does happen, but the findings are still partly disappointing: currently, many potential benefits are not achieved. Still, the findings are encouraging: there are indeed good, reusable components properly verified and documented, and mature organizations who manage to reuse these components efficiently, e.g. by leveraging the previous component verification. We also find that replacing one component for another is not necessarily complicated and costly.

Keywords

Software Component Requirement Engineer Requirement Elicitation Software Reuse Component Selection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Szyperski, C.: Component Software, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wallnau, K., Hissam, S., Seacord, R.: Building Systems from Commercial Components. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Crnkovic, I., Chaudron, M., Larsson, S.: Component-based Development Process and Component Lifecycle. In: International Conference on Software Engineering Advances (ICSEA 2006), Tahiti (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hissam, S., Moreno, G., Stafford, J., Wallnau, K.: Packaging Predictable Assembly with Prediction-Enabled Component Technology, Pittsburgh (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Land, R., Carlson, J., Larsson, S., Crnkovic, I.: Towards Guidelines for a Development Process for Component-Based Embedded Systems. In: Workshop on Software Engineering Processes and Applications (SEPA), Yongin, Korea. LNCS (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Karlsson, E.-A.: Software Reuse: A Holistic Approach. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Chichester (1995)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mohagheghi, P., Conradi, R.: Quality, Productivity and Economic Benefits of Software Reuse: A Review of Industrial Studies. Journal of Empirical Software Engineering 12(5), 471-516 (2007) Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Li, J., Torchiano, M., Conradi, R., Slyngstad, O., Bunse, C.: A State-of-the-Practice Survey of Off-the-Shelf Component-Based Development Processes. In: Morisio, M. (ed.) ICSR 2006. LNCS, vol. 4039, pp. 16–28. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Li, J., Conradi, R., Bunse, C., Torchiano, M., Slyngstad, O., Morisio, M.: Development with Off-The-Shelf Components: 10 Facts. IEEE Software 26(2), 80–87 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cooper, K.: Can Agility be Introduced into Requirements Engineering for COTS Component Based Development? In: International Workshop on Software Product Management, IWSPM (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Beck, K.: EXtreme Programming EXplained: Embrace Change. Addison Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Krasteva, I., Branger, P., Land, R.: Challenges for Agile Development of COTS Components and COTS-Based Systems – A Theoretical Examination, Funchal, Portugal (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tassey, G.: The Economic Impacts of Inadequate Infrastructure for Software Testing (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aoyama, M.: New age of software development: How component-based software engineering changes the way of software development. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on Component-Based Software Engineering (1998)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Land, R., Blankers, L., Chaudron, M., Crnkovic, I.: COTS Selection Best Practices in Literature and in Industry. In: Mei, H. (ed.) ICSR 2008. LNCS, vol. 5030, pp. 100–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oberndorf, P., Brownsword, L., Morris, E., Sledge, C.: In: Workshop on COTS-Based Systems (1997)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Krasteva, I., Land, R., Sajeev, A.: Being Agile when Developing Software Components and Component-Based Systems – Experiences from Industry. In: EuroSPI, Madrid, Spain (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Maiden, N., Ncube, C.: Acquiring COTS Software Selection Requirements. IEEE Software 15(2) (1998)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Alves, C., Castro, J.: CRE: a systematic method for COTS components Selection. In: Proceedings of the XV Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering (SBES), Rio de Janeiro (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chung, L., Cooper, K.: Defining Goals in a COTS-Aware Requirements Engineering Approach. Systems Engineering 7(1) (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Burgués, X., Estay, C., Franch, X., Pastor, J., Quer, C.: Combined Selection of COTS Components. In: Dean, J., Gravel, A. (eds.) ICCBSS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2255, pp. 54–64. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bhuta, J., Boehm, B.: A Method for Compatible COTS Component Selection. In: Franch, X., Port, D. (eds.) ICCBSS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3412, pp. 132–143. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Causevic, A., Krasteva, I., Land, R., Sajeev, A., Sundmark, D.: An Industrial Survey on Software Process Practices, Preferences and Methods (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Land, R., Alvaro, A., Crnkovic, I.: Towards Efficient Software Component Evaluation: An Examination of Component Selection and Certification. In: Euromicro SEAA SPPI Track, Parma, Italy (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rikard Land
    • 1
  • Daniel Sundmark
    • 1
  • Frank Lüders
    • 1
  • Iva Krasteva
    • 2
  • Adnan Causevic
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Innovation, Design and EngineeringMälardalen UniversityVästeråsSweden
  2. 2.Faculty of Mathematics and InformaticsSofia UniversitySofiaBulgaria

Personalised recommendations