Abstract
Much of the complexity of software architecture design is derived from the inadequate modularization of key broadly-scoped concerns, such as exception handling, distribution, and persistence. However, conventional architecture metrics are not sensitive to the driving architectural concerns, thereby leading a number of false positives and false negatives in the design assessment process. Therefore, there is a need for assessment techniques that support a more effective identification of early design modularity anomalies relative to crosscutting concerns. In this context, this paper proposes a concern-driven measurement framework for assessing architecture modularity. It encompasses a mechanism for documenting architectural concerns, and a suite of concern-oriented architecture metrics. We evaluated the usefulness of the proposed framework while comparing the modularity of architecture design alternatives in three different case studies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Briand, L., Morasca, S., Basili, V.: Measuring and Assessing Maintainability at the End of High Level Design. In: Proc. IEEE Conf. Software Maintenance (1993)
Buschmann, F., et al.: Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture: A System of Patterns. John Wiley, Chichester (1996)
Dobrica, L., Niemela, E.: A Survey on Software Architecture Analysis Methods. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng. 28(7), 638–653 (2002)
Garcia, A., et al.: On the Modular Representation of Architectural Aspects. In: Gruhn, V., Oquendo, F. (eds.) EWSA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4344, Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Garcia, A., Lucena, C.: Taming Heterogeneous Agent Architectures with Aspects. Comm. of the ACM, July 2006 (accepted to appear)
Garcia, A., et al.: Modularizing Design Patterns with Aspects: A Quantitative Study. In: AOSD 2005, pp. 3–14 (2005)
Concern-Driven Measurement Framework for Assessing Architecture Modularity, URL: http://www.lancs.ac.uk/postgrad/figueire/co_metrics
Garlan, D., et al.: ACME: An Architecture Description Interchange Language. In: Proc. CASCON 1997 (November 1997)
Lindvall, M., et al.: Avoiding Architectural Degeneration: An Evaluation Process for Software Architecture. In: Proc. of the Intl. Symposium on Software Metrics, USA, p. 77 (2002)
Lung, C., Kalaichelvan, K.: An Approach to Quantitative Software Architecture Sensitivity Analysis. In: Proc. of the Int’l Conf. on SW Eng & Knowledge Eng., pp. 185–192 (1998)
Di Stefano, A., et al.: Metrics for Evaluating Concern Separation and Composition. In: SAC 2005, pp. 1381–1382. ACM Press, New York (2005)
Sant’Anna, C., et al.: On the Quantitative Assessment of Modular Multi-Agent System Architectures. NetObjectDays (MASSA) (2006)
Shaw, M., Garlan, D.: Software Architecture: Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1996)
Kulesza, U., et al.: Quantifying the Effects of Aspect-Oriented Programming: A Maintenance Study. In: Proc. of ICSM 2006, Philadelphia, USA (September 2006)
Filman, R., et al. (eds.): Aspect-Oriented Software Development. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2005)
Martin, R.: Stability, C++ Report (February 1997)
Soares, S., et al.: Implementing Distribution and Persistence Aspects with Aspect J. In: Proc. of OOPSLA 2002, pp. 174–190 (2002)
Robillard, M., Murphy, G.: Concern Graphs: Finding and describing concerns using structural program dependencies. In: Proc. of the ICSE 2002, pp. 406–416 (May 2002)
Gamma, E., et al.: Design Patterns - Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1996)
Barbosa, R., Goldman, A.: MobiGrid. In: Karmouch, A., Korba, L., Madeira, E.R.M. (eds.) MATA 2004. LNCS, vol. 3284, pp. 147–157. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Bass, L., et al.: Software Architecture in Practice, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2003)
Figueiredo, E., Garcia, A., Lucena, C.: AJATO: an AspectJ Assessment Tool. In: Thomas, D. (ed.) ECOOP 2006. LNCS, vol. 4067, Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Filho, F., et al.: Exceptions and Aspects: The Devil is in the Details. In: Robshaw, M. (ed.) FSE 2006. LNCS, vol. 4047, Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Eaddy, M., et al.: Identifying, Assigning, and Quantifying Crosscutting Concerns. In: ACoM 2007 at ICSE 2007. 1st Workshop on Assessment of Contemporary Modularization Techniques (2007)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Sant’Anna, C., Figueiredo, E., Garcia, A., Lucena, C.J.P. (2007). On the Modularity of Software Architectures: A Concern-Driven Measurement Framework. In: Oquendo, F. (eds) Software Architecture. ECSA 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4758. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75132-8_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75132-8_17
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-75131-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-75132-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)