Towards a Common Query Language for Reverse Engineering

Graph queries are an enabling technique in reverse engineering. As the Graph Exchange Language (GXL) is more and more accepted as standard exchange format, a common graph query language taking advantage of the features of GXL would be an important aid in reverse engineering. As a first step to such a common graph query language, this paper discusses and contrasts two graph query approaches, whose underlying graph formats influenced the development of GXL noticeably. Comparing the features of GReQL and Grok lead to a set of requirements for a common GXL-based graph query language. * Andreas Winter is currently visiting University of Waterloo, School of Computer Science, Waterloo, Canada.

[1]  Andreas Winter,et al.  Exchanging Graphs with GXL , 2001, GD.

[2]  Frieder Stolzenburg,et al.  Loop-Detection in Hyper-Tableaux by Powerful Model Generation , 1999, J. Univers. Comput. Sci..

[3]  Jürgen Ebert,et al.  GraX-an interchange format for reengineering tools , 1999, Sixth Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (Cat. No.PR00303).

[4]  Jürgen Ebert,et al.  A Declarative Approach to Graph Based Modeling , 1994, WG.

[5]  Andy Schürr,et al.  GXL: toward a standard exchange format , 2000, Proceedings Seventh Working Conference on Reverse Engineering.

[6]  Andreas Winter,et al.  Querying as an enabling technology in software reengineering , 1999, Proceedings of the Third European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering (Cat. No. PR00090).

[7]  Jürgen Dix,et al.  Transformation-based bottom-up computation of the well-founded model , 1996, Theory and Practice of Logic Programming.

[8]  Atul Prakash,et al.  Querying source code using an algebraic query language , 1994, Proceedings 1994 International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[9]  Manfred Rosendahl,et al.  Specification of Symbols and Implementation of Their Constraints in JKogge , 2000 .

[10]  Norbert Eisinger,et al.  A Confluent Connection Calculus , 2000, Intellectics and Computational Logic.

[11]  Alfred Tarski,et al.  Relational selves as self-affirmational resources , 2008 .

[12]  Harry M. Sneed,et al.  Applying the graph-oriented GUPRO Approach in comparison to a Relational Database based Approach , 2001 .

[13]  Jürgen Dix,et al.  Super logic programs , 2000, TOCL.

[14]  Andre Postma,et al.  Applying Relation Partition Algebra for Reverse Architecting , 1999 .

[15]  Jens Woch,et al.  Implementation of a Schema-TAG-Parser , 1999 .

[16]  Stephan Philippi,et al.  Modelling a concurrent ray-tracing algorithm using object-oriented Petri-Nets , 2001 .

[17]  Oliver Obst,et al.  Towards a Logical Approach for Soccer Agents Engineering , 2000, RoboCup.

[18]  Richard C. Holt,et al.  Software architecture transformations , 2000, Proceedings 2000 International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[19]  Peter Baumgartner,et al.  The Taming of the (X)OR , 2000, Computational Logic.

[20]  Victor W. Marek,et al.  The Logic Programming Paradigm , 1999, Artificial Intelligence.

[21]  Oliver Obst,et al.  Spatial Agents Implemented in a Logical Expressible Language , 1999, RoboCup.

[22]  Joseph Douglas Horton,et al.  Merge Path Improvements for Minimal Model Hyper Tableaux , 1999, TABLEAUX.

[23]  Peter Baumgartner,et al.  Abductive Coreference by Model Construction , 1999 .

[24]  Guillermo R. Simari,et al.  lntroducing generalized specificity in logic programming , 2000 .

[25]  Ulrich Furbach,et al.  Nonmonotonic Reasoning: Towards Efficient Calculi and Implementations , 2001, Handbook of Automated Reasoning.