Fact or Fiction – Reuse in Rule-Based Model-to-Model Transformation Languages

  • Manuel Wimmer
  • Gerti Kappel
  • Angelika Kusel
  • Werner Retschitzegger
  • Johannes Schönböck
  • Wieland Schwinger
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7307)


Model transformations are mostly developed from scratch. For increasing development productivity as well as quality of model transformations, reuse mechanisms are indispensable. Although numerous mechanisms have been proposed, no systematic comparison exists making it unclear, which reuse mechanisms may be best employed in a certain situation. Therefore, this paper provides an in-depth comparison of reuse mechanisms in rule-based model-to-model transformation languages and categorizes them along their intended scope of application. For this, a systematic comparison framework for reuse mechanisms is proposed to highlight commonalities as well as differences. Finally, current barriers to model transformation reuse are outlined.


Reuse Mechanisms Model Transformations Comparison 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Agrawal, A., Vizhanyo, A., Kalmar, Z., Shi, F., Narayanan, A., Karsai, G.: Reusable Idioms and Patterns in Graph Transformation Languages. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 127(1), 181–192 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bézivin, J., Rumpe, B., Schürr, A., Tratt, L.: Model Transformations in Practice Workshop. In: Bruel, J.-M. (ed.) MODELS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3844, pp. 120–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Biggerstaff, T.J., Richter, C.: Reusability Framework, Assessment, and Directions. In: Software Reusability. Concepts and Models, vol. 1, pp. 1–17 (1989)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cariou, E., Belloir, N., Barbier, F., Djemam, N.: OCL contracts for the verification of model transformations. ECEASST 24 (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cuadrado, J.S., Molina, J.G.: Approaches for Model Transformation Reuse: Factorization and Composition. In: Vallecillo, A., Gray, J., Pierantonio, A. (eds.) ICMT 2008. LNCS, vol. 5063, pp. 168–182. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cuadrado, J.S., Guerra, E., de Lara, J.: Generic Model Transformations: Write Once, Reuse Everywhere. In: Cabot, J., Visser, E. (eds.) ICMT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6707, pp. 62–77. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cuadrado, J.S., Jouault, F., Molina, J.G., Bézivin, J.: Experiments with a High-Level Navigation Language. In: Paige, R.F. (ed.) ICMT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5563, pp. 229–238. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cuadrado, J.S., Molina, J.G.: A Model-Based Approach to Families of Embedded Domain-Specific Languages. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 35, 825–840 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Del Fabro, M., Valduriez, P.: Towards the Efficient Development of Model Transformations using Model Weaving and Matching Transformations. Journal on SoSyM 8(3), 305–324 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guerra, E., de Lara, J., Kolovos, D.S., Paige, R.F., dos Santos, O.M.: transML: A Family of Languages to Model Model Transformations. In: Petriu, D.C., Rouquette, N., Haugen, Ø. (eds.) MODELS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6394, pp. 106–120. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Iacob, M.-E., Steen, M.W.A., Heerink, L.: Reusable Model Transformation Patterns. In: Proc. of EDOCW 2008, pp. 1–10 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kavimandan, A., Gokhale, A., Karsai, G., Gray, J.: Templatized Model Transformations: Enabling Reuse in Model Transformations. Technical report, Vanderbilt University (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kleppe, A.: MCC: A Model Transformation Environment. In: Rensink, A., Warmer, J. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4066, pp. 173–187. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kramer, J.: Is Abstraction the Key to Computing? Commun. ACM 50, 36–42 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Krueger, C.W.: Software Reuse. ACM Comput. Surv. 24(2), 131–183 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kurtev, I.: Application of Reflection in a Model Transformation Language. SoSyM 9(3), 311–333 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lau, K., Rana, T.: A Taxonomy of Software Composition Mechanisms. In: Proc. of SEAA 2010, pp. 102–110. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Legros, E., Amelunxen, C., Klar, F., Schürr, A.: Generic and Reflective Graph Transformations for Checking and Enforcement of Modeling Guidelines. Visual Language Computing 20(4), 252–268 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mili, A., Mili, R., Mittermeir, R.: A Survey of Software Reuse Libraries. Annals of Software Engineering 5, 349–414 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mili, H., Mili, F., Mili, A.: Reusing software: Issues and Research Directions. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 21(6), 528–562 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moha, N., Mahé, V., Barais, O., Jézéquel, J.-M.: Generic Model Refactorings. In: Schürr, A., Selic, B. (eds.) MODELS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5795, pp. 628–643. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Oldevik, J.: Transformation Composition Modelling Framework. In: Kutvonen, L., Alonistioti, N. (eds.) DAIS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3543, pp. 108–114. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rivera, J.E., Ruiz-Gonzalez, D., Lopez-Romero, F., Bautista, J., Vallecillo, A.: Orchestrating ATL Model Transformations. In: Proc. of MtATL 2009, pp. 34–46 (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sijtema, M.: Introducing Variability Rules in ATL for Managing Variability in MDE-based Product Lines. In: Proc of MtATL 2010, pp. 39–49 (2010)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tisi, M., Cabot, J., Jouault, F.: Improving Higher-Order Transformations Support in ATL. In: Tratt, L., Gogolla, M. (eds.) ICMT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6142, pp. 215–229. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tisi, M., Jouault, F., Fraternali, P., Ceri, S., Bézivin, J.: On the Use of Higher-Order Model Transformations. In: Paige, R.F., Hartman, A., Rensink, A. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5562, pp. 18–33. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Vanhooff, B., Ayed, D., Van Baelen, S., Joosen, W., Berbers, Y.: UniTI: A Unified Transformation Infrastructure. In: Engels, G., Opdyke, B., Schmidt, D.C., Weil, F. (eds.) MODELS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4735, pp. 31–45. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Varró, D., Pataricza, A.: Generic and Meta-transformations for Model Transformation Engineering. In: Baar, T., Strohmeier, A., Moreira, A., Mellor, S.J. (eds.) UML 2004. LNCS, vol. 3273, pp. 290–304. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wagelaar, D., Van Der Straeten, R., Deridder, D.: Module Superimposition: A Composition Technique for Rule-based Model Transformation Languages. SoSyM Journal 9, 285–309 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wimmer, M., Kappel, G., Kusel, A., Retschitzegger, W., Schönböck, J., Schwinger, W.: Surviving the Heterogeneity Jungle with Composite Mapping Operators. In: Tratt, L., Gogolla, M. (eds.) ICMT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6142, pp. 260–275. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wimmer, M., Kappel, G., Kusel, A., Retschitzegger, W., Schönböck, J., Schwinger, W.: Towards an Expressivity Benchmark for Mappings based on a Systematic Classification of Heterogeneities. In: Proc. of MDI 2010 @ MoDELS 2010, pp. 32–41 (2010)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wimmer, M., Kappel, G., Kusel, A., Retschitzegger, W., Schönböck, J., Schwinger, W., Kolovos, D., Paige, R., Lauder, M., Schürr, A., Wagelaar, D.: A Comparison of Rule Inheritance in Model-to-Model Transformation Languages. In: Cabot, J., Visser, E. (eds.) ICMT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6707, pp. 31–46. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manuel Wimmer
    • 1
  • Gerti Kappel
    • 1
  • Angelika Kusel
    • 2
  • Werner Retschitzegger
    • 2
  • Johannes Schönböck
    • 1
  • Wieland Schwinger
    • 2
  1. 1.Vienna University of TechnologyAustria
  2. 2.Johannes Kepler University LinzAustria

Personalised recommendations