Advertisement

A Comparison of Six Languages for System Level Description of Telecom Applications

  • Axel Jantsch
  • Shashi Kumar
  • Ingo Sander
  • Bengt Svantesson
  • Johnny Öberg
  • Ahmed Hemani
  • Peeter Ellervee
  • Mattias O’Nils
Chapter

Abstract

Based on a systematic evaluation method with a large number of criteria we compare six languages with respect to the suitability as a system specification and description language for telecom applications. The languages under evaluation are VHDL, C++, SDL, Haskell, Erlang, and ProGram. The evaluation method allows to give specific emphasis on particular aspects in a controlled way, which we use to make separate comparisons for pure software systems, pure hardware systems and mixed HW/SW systems.

Keywords

Specification Document Suitability Index Telecom Application Tool Maturity Language Evaluation 
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]
    M. A. Ardis, J. A. Chaves, L. J. Jagadeesan, P. Mataga, C. Puchol, M. G. Staskauskas, J. Von Olnhausen, “A Framework for Evaluating Specification Methods for Reactive Systems — Experience Report”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, June 1996.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Sanjiv Narayan and Daniel D Gajski, “Features Supporting System-Level Specification in HDLs”, pp. 540–545, European Design Automation Conference, September 1993.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Alan M. Davis, “A Comparison of Techniques for the Specification of External System behaviour”, Communications of the ACM, pp. 1098–1115, September 1988.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    A.Nordström, H.Pettersson, An Evaluation of Graphical HDL Tools with Aspects on Design Methodology and Reusability, Ericsson, Sweden, Report JR/M-97: 1676, 1997.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Claus Lewerentz and Thomas Lindner, ed., Case Study “Production Cell”: A Comparative Study in Formal Software Development, Forschungszentrum Informatik, Universität Karlsruhe, report no. FZI-Publication 1/94, Karlsruhe, Germany, 1994.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    J.Armstrong, R.Virding, M.Williams, Concurrent Programming in Erlang, Prentice Hall, 1993.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    M. De Prycker, Asynchronous Transfer Mode solutions for broadband ISDN, Series in Computer Communications and Networking, Ellis Horwood 1991.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    ITU-T Telecommunication Standardization sector of ITU Recommendation I.150, I.211, 1.311, I.321, I.327, I.361, I.362,1.363, L413, I.432, 1. 610.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    A. Jantsch, S. Kumar, A. Hemani, “The Rugby Model: A Framework for the Study of Modelling, Analysis, and Synthesis Concepts in Electronic Systems”, Proceedings of Design Automation and Test in Europe (DATE), 1999.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    A. Jantsch, S. Kumar, I. Sander, B. Svantesson, J. Oberg, and A. Hemani, Evaluation of Languages for Specification of Telecom Systems, report no. TRITA-ESD-1998–04, Department of Electronics, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 1998.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    A. Jantsch and I. Sander, “On the Roles of Functions and Objects in System Specification”, Proceedings of the International Workshop on Hardware/Software Codesign, 2000.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    A. Olsen, O Færgemand, B. Moller-Pedersen, R. Reed, and J.R.W Smith, Systems Engineering with SDL-92, North Holland, 1995.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    J. Oberg, ProGram: A Grammar-Based Method for Specification and Hardware Synthesis of Communication Protocols, PhD thesis, Dep. of Electronics, Royal Institute of Technology, TRITA-ESD-1999–03, 1999.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    J. Peterson and K. Hammond, editors, Haskell Report 1.4, http://haskell.org/.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Axel Jantsch
    • 1
  • Shashi Kumar
    • 2
  • Ingo Sander
    • 1
  • Bengt Svantesson
    • 1
  • Johnny Öberg
    • 1
  • Ahmed Hemani
    • 1
  • Peeter Ellervee
    • 3
  • Mattias O’Nils
    • 4
  1. 1.Royal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden
  2. 2.Jönköping UniversityJönköpingSweden
  3. 3.Tallinn Technical UniversityTallinnEstonia
  4. 4.Mid Sweden UniversitySundsvallSweden

Personalised recommendations