Modelling Adaptable Distributed Object Oriented Systems Using the HATS Approach: A Fredhopper Case Study

  • Peter Y. H. Wong
  • Nikolay Diakov
  • Ina Schaefer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7421)

Abstract

The HATS project aims at developing a model-centric engineering methodology for the design, implementation and verification of distributed, concurrent and highly configurable systems. Such systems also have high demands on their dependability and trustworthiness. The HATS approach is centered around the Abstract Behavioural Specification modelling language (ABS) and its accompanying tools suite. The HATS approach allows the precise specification and analysis of the abstract behaviour of distributed software systems and their variability. The HATS project measures its success by applying its framework not only to toy examples, but to real industrial scenarios. In this paper, we evaluate the HATS approach for modelling an industrial scale case study provided by the eCommerce company Fredhopper. In this case study we consider Fredhopper Access Server (FAS). We model the commonality and variability of FAS’s replication system using the ABS language and provide an evaluation based on our experience.

Keywords

Variability modelling Software product lines Industrial case study Formal modelling and specification Evaluation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ahrendt, W., Dylla, M.: A system for compositional verification of asynchronous objects. Science of Computer Programming (2010), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scico.2010.08.003
  2. 2.
    Apel, S., Janda, F., Trujillo, S., Kästner, C.: Model Superimposition in Software Product Lines. In: Paige, R.F. (ed.) ICMT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5563, pp. 4–19. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Apel, S., Leich, T., Rosenmüller, M., Saake, G.: FeatureC++: On the Symbiosis of Feature-Oriented and Aspect-Oriented Programming. In: Glück, R., Lowry, M. (eds.) GPCE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3676, pp. 125–140. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Apel, S., Lengauer, C.: Superimposition: A Language-Independent Approach to Software Composition. In: Pautasso, C., Tanter, É. (eds.) SC 2008. LNCS, vol. 4954, pp. 20–35. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Apel, S., Lengauer, C., Möller, B., Kästner, C.: An algebraic foundation for automatic feature-based program synthesis. Science of Computer Programming 75(11), 1022–1047 (2010)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Apel, S., Scholz, W., Lengauer, C., Kästner, C.: Detecting Dependences and Interactions in Feature-Oriented Design. In: IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Atkinson, C., Bayer, J., Muthig, D.: Component-Based Product Line Development: The KobrA Approach. In: SPLC (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Batory, D., Geraci, B.: Composition Validation and Subjectivity in GenVoca Generators. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (February 1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Batory, D., Sarvela, J., Rauschmayer, A.: Scaling Step-Wise Refinement. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 30(6) (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Clarke, D., Diakov, N., Hähnle, R., Johnsen, E.B., Puebla, G., Weitzel, B., Wong, P.Y.H.: HATS: A Formal Software Product Line Engineering Methodology. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on Formal Methods in Software Product Line Engineering (September 2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Clarke, D., Diakov, N., Hähnle, R., Johnsen, E.B., Schaefer, I., Schäfer, J., Schlatte, R., Wong, P.Y.H.: Modeling Spatial and Temporal Variability with the HATS Abstract Behavioral Modeling Language. In: Bernardo, M., Issarny, V. (eds.) SFM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6659, pp. 417–457. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Clarke, D., Helvensteijn, M., Schaefer, I.: Abstract Delta Modeling. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Generative Programming and Component Engineering, GPCE 2010, pp. 13–22. ACM, New York (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Clarke, D., Muschevici, R., Proença, J., Schaefer, I., Schlatte, R.: Variability Modelling in the ABS Language. In: Aichernig, B.K., de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M. (eds.) FMCO 2011. LNCS, vol. 6957, pp. 204–224. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Classen, A., Boucher, Q., Heymans, P.: A text-based approach to feature modelling: Syntax and semantics of TVL. Science of Computer Programming (November 2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S., Eisenecker, U.: Formalizing cardinality-based feature models and their specialization. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 10(1), 7–29 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    de Boer, F.S., Clarke, D., Johnsen, E.B.: A Complete Guide to the Future. In: De Nicola, R. (ed.) ESOP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4421, pp. 316–330. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Requirement Elicitation. Deliverable 5.1 of project FP7-231620 (HATS) (August 2009), http://www.hats-project.eu
  18. 18.
    Evaluation of Core Framework. Deliverable 5.2 of project FP7-231620 (HATS) (August 2010), http://www.hats-project.eu
  19. 19.
    Gomaa, H.: Designing Software Product Lines with UML. Addison Wesley (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Haugen, Ø., Møller-Pedersen, B., Oldevik, J., Olsen, G., Svendsen, A.: Adding Standardized Variability to Domain Specific Languages. In: SPLC (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Heidenreich, F., Wende, C.: Bridging the Gap Between Features and Models. In: Aspect-Oriented Product Line Engineering, AOPLE 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jayaraman, P., Whittle, J., Elkhodary, A.M., Gomaa, H.: Model Composition in Product Lines and Feature Interaction Detection Using Critical Pair Analysis. In: Engels, G., Opdyke, B., Schmidt, D.C., Weil, F. (eds.) MoDELS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4735, pp. 151–165. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Johnsen, E.B., Hähnle, R., Schäfer, J., Schlatte, R., Steffen, M.: ABS: A Core Language for Abstract Behavioral Specification. In: Aichernig, B.K., de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M. (eds.) FMCO 2011. LNCS, vol. 6957, pp. 142–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Johnsen, E.B., Owe, O., Schlatte, R., Tapia Tarifa, S.L.: Validating Timed Models of Deployment Components with Parametric Concurrency. In: Beckert, B., Marché, C. (eds.) FoVeOOS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6528, pp. 46–60. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kästner, C., Apel, S., Kuhlemann, M.: Granularity in software product lines. In: ICSE, pp. 311–320 (2008)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lopez-Herrejon, R.E., Batory, D.: A Standard Problem for Evaluating Product-Line Methodologies. In: Dannenberg, R.B. (ed.) GCSE 2001. LNCS, vol. 2186, pp. 10–24. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lopez-Herrejon, R.E., Batory, D., Cook, W.: Evaluating Support for Features in Advanced Modularization Technologies. In: Gao, X.-X. (ed.) ECOOP 2005. LNCS, vol. 3586, pp. 169–194. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Matinlassi, M.: Comparison of Software Product Line Architecture Design Methods: COPA, FAST, FORM, KobrA and QADA. In: International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2004), pp. 127–136. IEEE Computer Society (2004)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mezini, M., Ostermann, K.: Variability management with feature-oriented programming and aspects. In: SIGSOFT FSE, pp. 127–136. ACM (2004)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Noda, N., Kishi, T.: Aspect-Oriented Modeling for Variability Management. In: SPLC (2008)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pohl, K., Böckle, G., Van Der Linden, F.: Software Product Line Engineering: Foundations, Principles, and Techniques. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Prehofer, C.: Feature-Oriented Programming: A Fresh Look at Objects. In: Aksit, M., Auletta, V. (eds.) ECOOP 1997. LNCS, vol. 1241, pp. 419–443. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Schaefer, I., Bettini, L., Bono, V., Damiani, F., Tanzarella, N.: Delta-Oriented Programming of Software Product Lines. In: Bosch, J., Lee, J. (eds.) SPLC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6287, pp. 77–91. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schaefer, I., Hähnle, R.: Formal methods in software product line engineering. IEEE Computer 44(2), 82–85 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Völter, M., Groher, I.: Product Line Implementation using Aspect-Oriented and Model-Driven Software Development. In: SPLC, pp. 233–242 (2007)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wong, P.Y.H., Albert, E., Muschevici, R., Proença, J., Schäfer, J., Schlatte, R.: The ABS Tool Suite: Modelling, Executing and Analysing Distributed Adaptable Object-Oriented Systems (September 2011) (submitted for publication)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Y. H. Wong
    • 1
  • Nikolay Diakov
    • 1
  • Ina Schaefer
    • 2
  1. 1.Fredhopper B.V.AmsterdamThe Netherland
  2. 2.Technische Universität BraunschweigGermany

Personalised recommendations