Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

European Software Engineering Conference

ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering

ESEC 1997, SIGSOFT FSE 1997: Software Engineering — ESEC/FSE'97 pp 142–158Cite as

The design of a next-generation process language

  • Regular Sessions
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1301))

Abstract

Process languages remain a vital area of software process research. Among the important issue for process languages are semantic richness, ease of use, appropriate abstractions, process composability, visualization, and support for multiple paradigms. The need to balance semantic richness with ease of use is particularly critical.

JIL addresses these issues in a number of innovative ways. It models processes in terms of steps with a rich variety of semantic attributes. The JIL control model combines proactive and reactive control, conditional control, and more simple means of control-flow modeling via step composition and execution constraints. JIL facilitates ease of use through semantic factoring, the accommodation of incomplete step specifications, the fostering of simple sub-languages, and the ability to support visualizations. This approach allows processes to be programmed in a variety of terms, and to a variety of levels of detail, according to the needs of particular processes, projects, and programmers.

This work was supported in part by the Air Force Materiel Command, Rome Laboratory, and the Advanced Research Projects Agency under Contract F3060294-C-0137

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. D. Baker, D. Fisher, and J. Shultis.The Gardens of Iris. Incremental Systems Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  2. R. Balzer. Tolerating inconsistency. In Proc. of the 13th Internat. Conf. on Software Engineering, pages 158–165. IEEE, May 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  3. S. Bandinelli and A. Fuggetta. Computational reflection in software process modeling: the SLANG approach. In Proc. of the 15th Internat. Conf. on Software Engineering, pages 144–154. IEEE, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  4. S. Bandinelli, A. Fuggetta, and S. Grigolli. Process modeling in-the-large with SLANG. In Proc. of the Second Internat. Conf. on the Software Process, pages 75–83. IEEE, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  5. N. S. Barghouti. Supporting cooperation in the MARVEL process-centered SDE. In H. Weber, editor, 5th ACM SIGSOFT Symp. on Software Development Environments, pages 21–31, Tyson's Corner VA, December 1992. ACM Press. Special issue of Software Engineering Notes, 17(5), December 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  6. N. Belkhatir, J. Estublier, and M. L. Walcelio. ADELE-TEMPO: An environment to support process modelling and enaction. In A. Finkelstein, J. Kramer, and B. Nuseibeh, editors, Software Process Modelling and Technology, pages 187–222. John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  7. G. A. Bolcer and R. N. Taylor. Endeavors: A process system integration infrastructure. In Proc. of the Fourth Internat. Conf. on the Software Process, pages 76–85. IEEE, Dec. 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  8. G. Booch.Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with Applications. The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Inc., second edition, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  9. R. H. Campbell and A. N. Haberman. The Specification of Process Synchronization by Path Expressions. In Operating Systems-Proc. of an Int. Symposium, Rocquencourt, France, volume 16 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 89102. Springer, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  10. G. Canals, N. Boudjlida, J.-C. Derniame, C. Godart, and J. Lonchamp. EPOS: Object-oriented cooperative process modelling. In A. Finkelstein, J. Kramer, and B. Nuseibeh, editors, ALF: A Framework for Building Process-Centred Software Engineering Environments, pages 153–185. John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  11. D. Cohen. AP5 Manual. Univ. of Southern California, Information Sciences Institute, March 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  12. R. Conradi, C. Fernström, and A. Fuggetta. Concepts for evolving software processes. In A. Finkelstein, J. Kramer, and B. Nuseibeh, editors, Software Process Modelling and Technology, pages 9–31. John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  13. R. Conradi, M. Hagaseth, J.-O. Larsen, M. N. Nguyên, B. P. Munch, P. H. Westby, W. Zhu, M. L. Jaccheri, and C. Liu. EPOS: Object-oriented cooperative process modelling. In A. Finkelstein, J. Kramer, and B. Nuseibeh, editors, Software Process Modelling and Technology, pages 33–70. John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  14. R. Darimont and A. van Lamsweerde. Formal refinement patterns for goal-driven requirements elaboration. In Proceedings of the Fourth ACM SIGSOFT Symp. on the Foundations of Software Engineering, pages 179–190, Oct. 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  15. W. Deiters and V. Gruhn. Managing software processes in the environment melmac. In Proc. of the Fourth ACM SIGSOFT Symp. on Practical Software Development Environments, pages 193–205. ACM Press, 1990. Irvine, California.

    Google Scholar 

  16. M. B. Dwyer and L. A. Clarke. Data Flow Analysis for Verifying Properties of Concurrent Programs. In Proceedings of the Second ACM SIGSOFT Symp. on Foundations of Software Engineering, New Orleans, pages 62–75. ACM Press, December 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  17. W. Emmerich, S. Bandinelli, L. Lavazza, and J. Arlow. Fine grained process modelling: An experiment at british airways. In Proc. of the Fourth Internat. Conf. on the Software Process, pages 2–12. IEEE, Dec. 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  18. C. Fernström. PROCESS WEAVER: Adding process support to UNIX. In Proc. of the Second Internat. Conf. on the Software Process, pages 12–26, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  19. W. Harrison and H. Ossher. Subject-Oriented Programming: A Critique of Pure Objects. In Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications, pages 411–428, October 1993. Published as ACM SIGPLAN Notices 28(10).

    Google Scholar 

  20. D. Heimbigner. Experiences with an Object-Manager for A Process-Centered Environment. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth Internat. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases, Vancouver, B.C., 24–27 August 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  21. D. Heimbigner. The ProcessWall: A Process State Server Approach to Process Programming. In Proc. Fifth ACM SIGSOFT/SIGPLAN Symp. on Software Development Environments, pages 159–168, Washington, D.C., 9–11 December 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  22. H. Iida, K.-I. Mimura, K. Inoue, and K. Torii. Hakoniwa: Monitor and navigation system for cooperative development based on activity sequence model. In Proc. of the Second Internat. Conf. on the Software Process, pages 64–74. IEEE, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  23. G. Junkermann, B. Peuschel, W. Schafer, and S. Wolf. MERLIN: Supporting cooperation in software development through a knowledge-based environment. In A. Finkelstein, J. Kramer, and B. Nuseibeh, editors, Software Process Modelling and Technology, pages 103–129. John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  24. G. E. Kaiser, N. S. Barghouti, and M. H. Sokolsky. Experience with process modeling in the MARVEL software development environment kernel. In B. Shriver, editor, 23rd Annual Hawaii Internat. Conf. on System Sciences, volume II, pages 131–140, Kona HI, January 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  25. G. E. Kaiser, S. S. Popovich, and I. Z. Ben-Shaul. A bi-level language for software process modeling. In W. F. Tichy, editor, Configuration Management, number 2 in Trends in Software, chapter 2, pages 39–72. John Wiley & Sons, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  26. T. Katayama. A hierarchical and functional software process description and its enaction. In Proc. of the 11th Internat. Conf. on Software Engineering, pages 343–353. IEEE, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  27. C. Montangero and V. Ambriola. OIKOS: Constructing process-centered sdes. In A. Finkelstein, J. Kramer, and B. Nuseibeh, editors, Software Process Modelling and Technology, pages 33–70. John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  28. L. J. Osterweil. A Process-Object Centered View of Software Environment Architecture. In R. Conradi, D. T, and D. Wanvik, editors, Advanced Programming Environments, pages 156–174, Trondheim, 1986. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  29. L. J. Osterweil. Software processes are software, too. In Proc. Ninth Internat. Conf. on Software Engineering. IEEE, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  30. H. D. Rombach and M. Verlage. How to assess a software process modeling formalism from a project member's point of view. In Proc. of the Second Internat. Conf. on the Software Process, pages 147–159. IEEE, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  31. M. Saeki, T. Kaneko, and M. Sakamoto. A method for software process modeling and description using LOTOS. In Proc. of the First Internat. Conf. on the Software Process, pages 90–104. IEEE, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  32. S. M. Sutton, Jr.Preconditions, postconditions, and provisional execution in software processes. Technical Report UM-CS-95-77, University of Massachusetts, Computer Science Department, Amherst, MA 01003, August 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  33. S. M. Sutton, Jr., D. Heimbigner, and L. J. Osterweil. APPL/A: A language for software-process programming. ACM Trans. on Software Engineering and Methodology, 4(3):221–286, July 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  34. S. M. Sutton, Jr. and L. J. Osterweil. The design of a next-generation process language. Technical Report UM-CS-96-30, University of Massachusetts, Computer Science Department, Amherst, MA 01003, May 1996. revised January, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  35. S. M. Sutton, Jr. and L. J. Osterweil. Programming parallel workflows in JIL. In Proceedings of the 9th Internat. Conf. on Parallel and Distributed Computing and Systems, 1997. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  36. M. Suzuki and T. Katayama. Meta-operations in the process model HFSP for the dynamics and flexibility of software processes. In Proc. of the First Internat. Conf. on the Software Process, pages 202–217. IEEE, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  37. P. L. Tarr and L. A. Clarke. PLEIADES: An Object Management System for Software Engineering Environments. In Proceedings of the First ACM SIGSOFT Symp. on the Foundations of Software Engineering, pages 56–70. IEEE, Dec. 1993.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of Massachusetts, 01003-4610, Amherst, MA

    Stanley M. Sutton Jr. & Leon J. Osterweil

Authors
  1. Stanley M. Sutton Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leon J. Osterweil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Mehdi Jazayeri Helmut Schauer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Sutton, S.M., Osterweil, L.J. (1997). The design of a next-generation process language. In: Jazayeri, M., Schauer, H. (eds) Software Engineering — ESEC/FSE'97. ESEC SIGSOFT FSE 1997 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1301. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63531-9_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63531-9_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-63531-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69592-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation