12 Conclusion
Software intensive systems need a much more systematic development approach based on well-worked out, well-chosen scientific foundations and validated engineering principles. Model oriented approaches contribute here.
The conclusion is straightforward: we need a much deeper and more intensive interaction between researchers in the foundations, the designers of practical engineering methods and tools, and the programmers and engineers in charge of the practical solutions.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Brodie ML, Michael Stonebraker (1995) Migrating Legacy Systems: Gateways, Interfaces & the Incremental Approach. Morgan Kaufmann, March 1995
Broy M (1991) Towards a formal foundation of the specification and description language SDL. Formal Aspects of Computing 3, 1991, 21–57
Broy M (1997) Refinement of Time. In: Bertran M, Rus Th (eds.): Transformation-Based Reactive System Development. ARTS’97, Mallorca 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1231, 1997, 44–63
Broy M, Stølen K (2001) Specification and Development of Interactive Systems: Focus on Streams, Interfaces, and Refinement. Springer 2001
Herzberg D, Broy M (2003) Modeling layered distributed communication systems. Applicable Formal Methods. Springer Verlag, Volume 17, Number 1, May 2005
Broy M, Deißenböck F, Pizka M (2005) A Holistic Approach to Software Quality at Work. 3rd World Congress for Software Quality (3WCSQ), 2005
Dijkstra EW (1968) Go To statement considered harmful. Communications of the ACM, 11(3), 1968.
Fenton N (1994) Software measurement: A necessary scientific basis. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 20(3):199–206, 1994.
IEEE (1998) Standard for a software quality metrics methodology. IEEE 1061, 1998
Jones C (2000) Software Assessments, Benchmarks, and Best Practices. Addison Wesley, 2000.
Katheder K (2003) A Survey on Software Maintenance Practices, Technische Universität München, November 2003
Lions JL (1996) ARIANE 5 — Flight 501 Failure. European Space Agency (ESA), July, 1996.
Paulk MC, Weber CV, Curtis B, Chrissis MB (1995) The capability maturity model, guidelines for improving the software process. Addison-Wesley 1995.
Parnas D (1972) On the criteria to be used to decompose systems into modules. Comm. ACM 15, 1972, 1053–1058
Pigoski TM (1996) Practical Software Maintenance. Wiley Computer Publishing, 1996
Selic B, Gullekson G, Ward PT (1994) Real-time Object-oriented Modeling. Wiley, New York 1994
SEI (2004) Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University. Maintainability Index Technique for Measuring Program Maintainability. January 2004, (http://www.sei.cmu.edu/str/descriptions/mitmpm.html)
SEQ (2001) Software engineering — Product quality — Part 1: Quality Model. ISO/IEC 9126-1, June 2001.
SEQ (2003) Software engineering — Product quality — Part 3: Internal metrics. ISO/IEC 9126-3, July 2003.
Standish (1995) Standish Group International, Inc. CHAOS. 1995
Standish (1999) Standish Group International, Inc. CHAOS: A Recipe for Success. 1999
Zave P, Jackson M (1997) Four dark corners of requirements engineering. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, January 1997
Zuse H (1996) A Framework of Software Measurement. Walter de Gruyter, 1998
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer Berlin · Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Broy, M. (2006). Innovation in Engineering Software Intensive Systems. In: Kern, EM., Hegering, HG., Brügge, B. (eds) Managing Development and Application of Digital Technologies. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-34129-3_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-34129-3_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-34128-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-34129-1
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)