A comparison of four design methods for real-time systems

The purpose of this paper is to compare four design methods which are of current interest in real-time software development. The comparison presents the relative strengths and weakness of each method with additional information on graphic notation and the recommended sequence of steps involved in the use of each method. The methods selected for comparison were:STRUCTURED DESIGN FOR REAL-TIME SYSTEMS OBJECT ORIENTED DESIGN PAMELA (Process Abstraction Method for Embedded Large Applications) SCR (Software Cost Reduction project - Naval Research Laboratory) Readers interested in a framework for comparing methods, an overview of the four selected methodologies, and an aid to narrowing candidates for adoption should find this find this paper helpful.

[1]  David Lorge Parnas,et al.  On the Design and Development of Program Families , 2001, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[2]  Sabina H. Saib,et al.  The ada programming language , 1983 .

[3]  Russ Abbott.  Program design by informal English descriptions , 1983, CACM.

[4]  David Lorge Parnas,et al.  Review of David L. Parnas' "Designing Software for Ease of Extension and Contraction" , 2004 .

[5]  Stephen N. Zilles,et al.  Specification techniques for data abstractions , 1975 .

[6]  Juris Hartmanis,et al.  The Programming Language Ada Reference Manual American National Standards Institute, Inc. ANSI/MIL-STD-1815A-1983 , 1983, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[7]  D. L. Parnas,et al.  On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules , 1972, Software Pioneers.

[8]  David Lorge Parnas,et al.  A rational design process: How and why to fake it , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[9]  David Lorge Parnas,et al.  A procedure for designing abstract interfaces for device interface modules , 1981, ICSE '81.

[10]  David Lorge Parnas,et al.  A-7E Software Module Guide. , 1981 .

[11]  Grady Booch,et al.  Object-oriented development , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[12]  John V. Guttag,et al.  Abstract data types and the development of data structures , 1976, Software Pioneers.

[13]  Graham Beech,et al.  Software engineering with ada , 1983 .

[14]  Douglas T. Ross,et al.  Structured Analysis for Requirements Definition , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[15]  Paul Clements,et al.  A Standard Organization for Specifying Abstract Interfaces. , 1984 .

[16]  Mack W. Alford.  SREM at the Age of Eight; The Distributed Computing Design System , 1985, Computer.

[17]  Paul T. Ward,et al.  The transformation schema: An extension of the data flow diagram to represent control and timing , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[18]  Paul Ward,et al.  Structured Development for Real-Time Systems , 1986 .

[19]  David Lorge Parnas,et al.  The Modular Structure of Complex Systems , 1984, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[20]  David Lorge Parnas,et al.  A technique for software module specification with examples , 1972, CACM.

[21]  David Lorge Parnas,et al.  Using traces to write abstract specifications for software modules , 1977 .

[22]  Ellis Horowitz,et al.  Abstract data types and software validation , 1978, CACM.