Accommodating Changing Requirements with EJB

Component Based Software Development promises to lighten the task of web application developers by providing a standard component architecture for building distributed object oriented business applications. Hard evidence consolidat-ing this promise has yet to be provided, especially knowing that the standard libraries of today’s programming languages offer considerable support for distribution (e.g. remote method invocations, database interfaces). Therefore, this paper compares three Java implementations of the same functionality – one using straightforward library-calls, one using a custom-made framework and one using the Enterprise Java Beans framework (EJB) – to assess the maintainability of each of the approaches. We ob-serve that EJB results in better maintainability (code is less complex and exhibits more explicit weak coupling) but that the framework version without the framework cost results in comparable numbers. Therefore, we conclude that Component Based Software Development is necessary for building websystems that will continue to survive in the context of rapidly changing requirements.

[1]  Paul W. Oman,et al.  Using metrics to evaluate software system maintainability , 1994, Computer.

[2]  Meir M. Lehman,et al.  Program evolution: processes of software change , 1985 .

[3]  Norman E. Fenton,et al.  Software Metrics: A Rigorous Approach , 1991 .

[4]  Robert L. Glass Maintenance: Less Is Not More , 1998, IEEE Softw..

[5]  Roger S. Pressman,et al.  Software Engineering: A Practitioner's Approach , 1982 .

[6]  Rudolf K. Keller,et al.  Design properties and object-oriented software changeability , 2000, Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering.

[7]  Roger S. Pressman,et al.  Software Engineering: A Practitioner's Approach (McGraw-Hill Series in Computer Science) , 2004 .

[8]  Shari Lawrence Pfleeger,et al.  Software metrics (2nd ed.): a rigorous and practical approach , 1997 .

[9]  Clemens A. Szyperski,et al.  Component software - beyond object-oriented programming , 2002 .

[10]  Shari Lawrence Pfleeger,et al.  Software Metrics : A Rigorous and Practical Approach , 1998 .

[11]  Pankaj Jalote,et al.  Effect of object orientation on maintainability of software , 1997, 1997 Proceedings International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[12]  Tor Guimaraes,et al.  Managing application program maintenance expenditures , 1983, CACM.

[13]  Kenneth J. Christensen,et al.  A Perspective on Software Science , 1981, IBM Syst. J..

[14]  Li Li,et al.  Algorithmic analysis of the impact of changes to object-oriented software , 1996, 1996 Proceedings of International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[15]  Martin Fowler,et al.  Refactoring - Improving the Design of Existing Code , 1999, Addison Wesley object technology series.

[16]  Leonard J. Bass,et al.  Scenario-Based Analysis of Software Architecture , 1996, IEEE Softw..

[17]  Mary Shaw,et al.  Software Metrics: An Analysis and Evaluation , 1981 .

[18]  Jan Bosch,et al.  Assessing optimal software architecture maintainability , 2001, Proceedings Fifth European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering.

[19]  A. Mili,et al.  Deening and Measuring Maintainability , 1995 .

[20]  E. B. Swanson,et al.  Software maintenance management , 1980 .