An Automated Tool to Support the Software Design Process
In this paper we present FESA, a Forward Engineer and System Analyzer, that supports the software design process based on the Model Driven Engineer paradigm. We show that by following the proposed ORDEREXP design rules during the elaboration of the ER (Entity Relation) diagram, FESA is able to construct the software prototype. ORDEREXP supports the software designer by providing more information about the modeled process and how final user graphic interface of the system will be, while preserving the DB scheme normal form. Design patterns are used by FESA for supporting the analysis of the ER diagram, in order to obtain additional recommendations and optimizations to the model.
Keywordsautomated software design software prototype graphic interface Design patterns
- 1.Objet Managment Group, 5 May 2011. [Online]. Available: http://www.omg.org/mda/. [Accessed 17 September 2011].
- 2.M. Antkiewicz, K. Czarnecki and M. Stephan, “Engineering of Framework-Specific Modeling Languages,” in IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 2009.Google Scholar
- 3.S. J. Mellor and M. Balcer, Executable UML: A foundation for model-driven architecture, Addison-Wesley Professional, 2002.Google Scholar
- 4.R. C. Landan, R. Li and M. R. Chaudron, “Towards automated software architectures design using model transformations and evolutionary algorithms,” in Proceedings of the 12th annual conference companion on Genetic and evolutionary computation, Portland, Oregon, USA, 2010.Google Scholar
- 5.S. Zhou, C. Xu, H. Wu, J. Zhang, Y. Lin, J. Wang, J. Gray and B. Bryant, “E-R modeler: a database modeling toolkit for Eclipse,” in ACM-SE 42 Proceedings of the 42nd annual Southeast regional conference, 2004.Google Scholar
- 6.L. Favre, L. Martinez and C. Pereira, “Transforming UML static models into object-oriented code,” in Proceedings. 37th International Conference on Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems, 2000. TOOLS-Pacific 2000., Sydney, NSW, 2000.Google Scholar
- 7.K. K. C. a. A. W. Bąk, “Feature and Meta-Models in Clafer: Mixed, Specialized, and Coupled,” in In Proceedings of the Third international conference on Software language engineering, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010.Google Scholar
- 8.G. Everest, “Gordon Everest,” in Fifth Texas Conference on Computing Systems, Austin, TX, 1976.Google Scholar
- 9.J. Feng, “An Analysis of ‘Fan Traps’ in an Eer Schema by Using a Set of ‘Info Concepts,” in Synergy Matters, A. Castell, A. Gregory, G. Hindle, M. James and G. Ragsdell, Eds., Springer US, 2002, pp. 541–546.Google Scholar
- 10.Sorcery Solutions, “Sorcery Solutions Home Page,” Sorcery Solutions Desgn, 23 01 2003. [Online]. Available: www.sorcery-solutions.com. [Accessed 1 12 2011].
- 12.A. Koziolek, H. Koziolek and R. Reussner, “PerOpteryx: automated application of tactics in multi-objective software architecture optimization,” in Proceedings of the joint ACM SIGSOFT conference -- QoSA and ACM SIGSOFT symposium -- ISARCS on Quality of software architectures -- QoSA and architecting critical systems -- ISARCS, Boulder, Colorado, USA, 2011.Google Scholar
- 14.X. Blanc, I. Mounier, A. Mougenot and T. Mens, “Detecting Model Inconsistency through Operation-Based Model Construction,” in Proceedings of the 30th international conference on Software engineering, Leipzig, Germany, 2008.Google Scholar
- 15.C. Thompson, J. White, B. Dougherty and D. C. Schmidt, “Optimizing Mobile Application Performance with Model-Driven Engineering,” in Proceedings of the 7th IFIP WG 10.2 International Workshop on Software Technologies for Embedded and Ubiquitous Systems, Newport Beach, CA, 2009.Google Scholar
- 16.V. Cortellessa, A. Di Marco and P. Inverardi, “Integrating performance and reliability analysis in a non-functional MDA framework,” in Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Fundamental approaches to software engineering, Braga, Portugal, 2007.Google Scholar