Enhanced connectors to support hierarchical dependencies in software architecture

The more important level of abstraction in the description of large and complex software is its architecture description. So, at this abstraction level we can describe the principal system components and their pathways of interaction. Software architecture is considered to be the driving aspect of the development process; it allows specifying which aspects and models in each level needed according to the software architecture design. Early Architecture Description Languages (ADLs), nearly exclusive, focus on structural abstraction hierarchy ignoring behavioural description hierarchy, conceptual hierarchy, and metamodeling hierarchy. In this paper we show that all those hierarchies constitute views to appropriately "reason about" software architectures described using our C3 metamodel which is a minimal and complete ADL. We provide a set of mechanisms to deal with different levels of each hierarchy; also we introduce a new enhanced definition for connector concept deployed in C3 architectures.

[1]  Mourad Oussalah,et al.  Improving Component-Based Software Architecture by Separating Computations from Interactions , 2004 .

[2]  Robert J. Allen.  A formal approach to software architecture , 1997 .

[3]  Mónica Pinto,et al.  A Dynamic Component and Aspect-Oriented Platform , 2005, Comput. J..

[4]  Mourad Oussalah,et al.  MADL: Meta Architecture Description Language , 2005, Third ACIS Int'l Conference on Software Engineering Research, Management and Applications (SERA'05).

[5]  Mourad Chabane Oussalah,et al.  Software architecture based connection manager , 2007, SEDE.

[6]  Richard N. Taylor,et al.  Architecture-based specification-time software evolution , 1999 .

[7]  Mourad Oussalah,et al.  Towards an Approach for Building Reliable Architectures , 2007, 2007 IEEE International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration.

[8]  Pierre Dissaux.  Architecture Description Languages - IFIP TC-2 Workshop on Architecture Description Languages (WADL), World Computer Congress, Aug. 22-27, 2004, Toulouse, France , 2005, IFIP-WADL.

[9]  William B. Frakes,et al.  Software reuse research: status and future , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[10]  David Garlan,et al.  Acme: architectural description of component-based systems , 2000 .

[11]  Heinz W. Schmidt,et al.  Trustworthy components - compositionality and prediction , 2003, J. Syst. Softw..

[12]  David Garlan,et al.  A Formal Approach to Software Architectures , 1992, IFIP Congress.

[13]  Jorge Enrique Pérez-Martínez.  Heavyweight extensions to the UML metamodel to describe the C3 architectural style , 2003, SOEN.

[14]  Richard N. Taylor,et al.  A Component- and Message-Based Architectural Style for GUI Software , 1995, 1995 17th International Conference on Software Engineering.

[15]  Richard N. Taylor,et al.  Moving Architectural Description from Under the Technology Lamppost , 2006, 32nd EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (EUROMICRO'06).

[16]  Maritta Heisel,et al.  Enhancing Dependability of Component-Based Systems , 2007, Ada-Europe.

[17]  Wilhelm Hasselbring,et al.  On A Software Architecture Description supporting Component Deployment and System Runtime Reconfiguration , 2004 .