Abstract

Testing model-to-model (M2M) transformations is becoming a prominent topic in the current Model-driven Engineering landscape. Current approaches for transformation testing, however, assume having explicit model representations for the input domain and for the output domain of the transformation. This excludes other important transformation kinds, such as model-to-text (M2T) and text-to-model (T2M) transformations, from being properly tested since adequate model representations are missing either for the input domain or for the output domain. The contribution of this paper to overcome this gap is extending Tracts, a M2M transformation testing approach, for M2T/T2M transformation testing. The main mechanism we employ for reusing Tracts is to represent text within a generic metamodel. By this, we transform the M2T/T2M transformation specification problems into equivalent M2M transformation specification problems. We demonstrate the applicability of the approach by two examples and present how the approach is implemented for the Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF). Finally, we apply the approach to evaluate code generation capabilities of several existing UML tools.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Amrani, M., Lúcio, L., Selim, G., Combemale, B., Dingel, J., Vangheluwe, H., Traon, Y.L., Cordy, J.R.: A Tridimensional Approach for Studying the Formal Verification of Model Transformations. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Verification and Validation of Model Transformations (VOLT 2012) @ ICST, pp. 921–928. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baudry, B., Dinh-Trong, T., Mottu, J.M., Simmonds, D., France, R., Ghosh, S., Fleurey, F., Traon, Y.L.: Model transformation testing challenges. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on Integration of Model Driven Development and Model Driven Testing (IMDD-MDT 2006) @ ECMDA (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baudry, B., Ghosh, S., Fleurey, F., France, R., Traon, Y.L., Mottu, J.M.: Barriers to Systematic Model Transformation Testing. Commun. ACM 53(6), 139–143 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brambilla, M., Cabot, J., Wimmer, M.: Model-Driven Software Engineering in Practice. Morgan & Claypool Publishers (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bruneliere, H., Cabot, J., Jouault, F., Madiot, F.: MoDisco: a generic and extensible framework for model driven reverse engineering. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2010), pp. 173–174. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cariou, E., Belloir, N., Barbier, F., Djemam, N.: OCL contracts for the verification of model transformations. ECEASST 24 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cariou, E., Marvie, R., Seinturier, L., Duchien, L.: OCL for the specification of model transformation contracts. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on OCL and Model Driven Engineering @ MODELS (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S.: Feature-based survey of model transformation approaches. IBM Systems Journal 45(3), 621–646 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    France, R.B., Rumpe, B.: Model-driven Development of Complex Software: A Research Roadmap. In: Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Software Engineering (ISCE 2007) - Future of Software Engineering Track, pp. 37–54. IEEE Computer Society (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    García-Domínguez, A., Kolovos, D.S., Rose, L.M., Paige, R.F., Medina-Bulo, I.: EUnit: A Unit Testing Framework for Model Management Tasks. In: Whittle, J., Clark, T., Kühne, T. (eds.) MODELS 2011. LNCS, vol. 6981, pp. 395–409. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Giner, P., Pelechano, V.: Test-Driven Development of Model Transformations. In: Schürr, A., Selic, B. (eds.) MODELS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5795, pp. 748–752. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gogolla, M., Büttner, F., Richters, M.: USE: A UML-based specification environment for validating UML and OCL. Science of Computer Programming 69, 27–34 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gogolla, M., Vallecillo, A.: Tractable Model Transformation Testing. In: France, R.B., Kuester, J.M., Bordbar, B., Paige, R.F. (eds.) ECMFA 2011. LNCS, vol. 6698, pp. 221–235. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guerra, E.: Specification-driven test generation for model transformations. In: Hu, Z., de Lara, J. (eds.) ICMT 2012. LNCS, vol. 7307, pp. 40–55. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Guerra, E., de Lara, J., Wimmer, M., Kappel, G., Kusel, A., Retschitzegger, W., Schönböck, J., Schwinger, W.: Automated verification of model transformations based on visual contracts. Autom. Softw. Eng. 20(1), 5–46 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kolovos, D., Paige, R., Rose, L., Polack, F.: Unit testing model management operations. In: Workshop Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Software Testing Verification and Validation (ICSTW 2008), pp. 97–104. IEEE Computer Society (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kolovos, D.S., Paige, R.F., Polack, F.A.: Model comparison: a foundation for model composition and model transformation testing. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Global Integrated Model Management (GaMMa 2006) @ ICSE, pp. 13–20. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kurtev, I., Bézivin, J., Akşit, M.: Technological spaces: An initial appraisal. In: Proceedings of the Confederated International Conferences (CoopIS, DOA, and ODBASE), Industrial track (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lin, Y., Zhang, J., Gray, J.: Model comparison: A key challenge for transformation testing and version control in model driven software development. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Best Practices for Model-Driven Software Development @ OOPSLA, pp. 219–236 (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lin, Y., Zhang, J., Gray, J.: A testing framework for model transformations. In: Beydeda, S., Book, M., Gruhn, V. (eds.) Model-Driven Software Development – Research and Practice in Software Engineering, pp. 219–236. Springer (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meyer, B.: Applying design by contract. IEEE Computer 25(10), 40–51 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mottu, J.M., Baudry, B., Traon, Y.L.: Model transformation testing: oracle issue. In: Workshop Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Software Testing Verification and Validation (ICSTW 2008), pp. 105–112. IEEE Computer Society (2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pérez-Castillo, R., de Guzmán, I.G.R., Piattini, M.: Knowledge Discovery Metamodel-ISO/IEC 19506: A standard to modernize legacy systems. Computer Standards & Interfaces 33(6), 519–532 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ramos, R., Barais, O., Jézéquel, J.M.: Matching Model-Snippets. In: Engels, G., Opdyke, B., Schmidt, D.C., Weil, F. (eds.) MODELS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4735, pp. 121–135. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Van Der Straeten, R., Mens, T., Van Baelen, S.: Challenges in Model-Driven Software Engineering. In: Chaudron, M.R.V. (ed.) MODELS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5421, pp. 35–47. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Stürmer, I., Conrad, M., Dörr, H., Pepper, P.: Systematic testing of model-based code generators. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 33(9), 622–634 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tiso, A., Reggio, G., Leotta, M.: Early Experiences on Model Transformation Testing. In: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on the Analysis of Model Transformations (AMT 2012) @ MODELS, pp. 15–20. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vallecillo, A., Gogolla, M., Burgueño, L., Wimmer, M., Hamann, L.: Formal Specification and Testing of Model Transformations. In: Bernardo, M., Cortellessa, V., Pierantonio, A. (eds.) SFM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7320, pp. 399–437. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manuel Wimmer
    • 1
  • Loli Burgueño
    • 2
  1. 1.Business Informatics GroupVienna University of TechnologyAustria
  2. 2.GISUM/Atenea Research GroupUniversidad de MálagaSpain

Personalised recommendations