The KIPS Transactions:PartD (정보처리학회논문지D)

Korea Information Processing Society (한국정보처리학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Method for Improving Description of Software Metrics Using Metric Description Language Based on OCL

OCL에 바탕을 둔 메트릭 기술 언어를 이용한 메트릭의 표현 방법 개선

  • 김태연 (부산대학교 컴퓨터공학과) ;
  • 김윤규 (부산대학교 컴퓨터공학과) ;
  • 채흥석 (부산대학교 컴퓨터공학과)
  • Published : 2008.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Because most metricsin the literatures are described by a natural language, they can be interpreted in an ambigous manner. To cope with this problem, there are some researches to express based on Object Constraint Language(OCL). Because OCL has been proposed to describe structural constraintsfor Unified Modeling Language(UML) diagrams, it is difficult and awkward. In this paper, we propose Metric Description Language(MDL) which is a high level language to describe metrics. MDL supports a modular description of complex metrics, aggregation function, and automatic navigation between entities. Moreover, we develop MetriUs for describing metrics using MDL and supporting an automated computation for UML diagrams. In a case study, we have described a variety of existing metrics using MDL and found that MDL contributes to producing simpler expression of metrics than OCL.

보다 정확한 표현을 위하여 Object Constraint Language(OCL)을 이용하여 메트릭을 기술하는 연구들이 있다. 그러나 OCL은 Unified Modeling Language(UML)에서 구조적 제약사항을 기술하기 위한 언어이기 때문에 메트릭을 표현하기에는 부적절하다. 본 논문에서는 이러한 문제점을 해결하기 위하여 메트릭을 표현하는 상위 수준의 언어인 Metric Description Language(MDL)을 제안한다. MDL은 복잡한 메트릭의 분할 기술, 집계함수, 대상간의 자동 탐색 기능을 지원하여 OCL의 복잡성 문제점을 해결하고 있다. 또한 본 논문은 MDL을 기술하고 UML 모델을 대상으로 메트릭의 자동 계산을 지원하는 도구를 개발하였다. 그리고 사례연구로 기존에 제시된 다양한 유형의 메트릭을 MDL로 기술하였으며 OCL로 표현된 메트릭보다 단순함을 확인하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. S. D. Conte, H. E. Dunsmore, and V. Y. Shen, Software engineering metrics and models: Benjamin-Cummings Publishing Co., Inc. Redwood City, CA, USA, 1986
  2. T. McCabe, “A software complexity measure,” IEEE Trans. Software Engineering, Vol.2, No.12, pp.308-320, 1976 https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.1976.233837
  3. S. R. Chidamber, C. F. Kemerer, and C. Mit, “A metrics suite for object oriented design,” Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, Vol.20, No.6, pp.476-493, 1994 https://doi.org/10.1109/32.295895
  4. G. Marcela, M. Esperanza, V. Aaron et al., “Building measure-based prediction models for UML class diagram maintainability,” Empirical Software Engineering, Vol.12, No.5, pp.517-549, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-007-9038-4
  5. W. Li, and S. Henry, “Object-oriented metrics that predict maintainability,” Journal of Systems and Software, Vol.23, No.2, pp.111-122, 1993 https://doi.org/10.1016/0164-1212(93)90077-B
  6. B. Henderson-Sellers, Object-oriented metrics: measures of complexity: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1995
  7. L. C. Briand, J. W. Daly, and J. Wüst, “A unified framework for cohesion measurement in object-oriented systems,” Empirical Software Engineering, Vol.3, No.1, pp.65-117, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009783721306
  8. L. C. Briand, J. W. Daly, and J. K. Wüst, “A unified framework for coupling measurement in object-oriented systems,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol.25, No.1, pp.91-121, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1109/32.748920
  9. O. M. G. UML, “2.0 OCL specification,” OMG Adopted Specification (ptc/03-10-14), 2003
  10. R. Reibing, “Towards a model for object-oriented design measurement,” Proceedings of the 5th International ECOOP Workshop on Quantitative Approaches in Object-Oriented Software Engineering (Budapest, June 2001), pp.71-84, 2001
  11. J. Warmer, and A. Kleppe, The object constraint language: precise modeling with UML: Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc. Boston, MA, USA, 1998
  12. L. Ol'khovich, and D. V. Koznov, “OCL-based automated validation method for UML specifications,” Programming and Computer Software, Vol.29, No.6, pp.323-327, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PACS.0000004132.42846.11
  13. P. Ziemann, and M. Gogolla, “Validating OCL specifications with the use tool an example based on the BART case study,” Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, Vol.80, pp.157-169, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1571-0661(04)80816-8
  14. M. Benattou, J. M. Bruel, and N. Hameurlain, “Generating test data from OCL specification,” ECOOP2002 Workshop on Integration and Transformation of UML Models (WITUML02), 2002
  15. L. Reynoso, M. Genero, and M. Piattini, “Towards a metric suite for OCL expressions expressed within UML/OCL models,” Journal of Comptuer Science and Technology, Vol.4, No.1, pp.38-44, 2004
  16. O. M. G. UML, “2.0 superstructure specification,” OMG ed, 2003
  17. M. Richters, A precise approach to validating UML models and OCL constraints: Logos, 2002
  18. Borland. “Together 2007,” http://www.borland.com/together/index.html
  19. Eclipse. “Eclipse MDT 0.9.1,” http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/
  20. J. Warmer, and A. Kleppe, “Octopus: OCL tool for precise UML specifications,” 2006
  21. A. Toval, V. Requena, and J. L. Fernandez, “Emerging OCL tools,” Software and Systems Modeling, Vol.2, No.4, pp.248-261, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-003-0031-0
  22. D. Chiorean. “OCL environment 2.0.4,” http://lci.cs.ubbcluj.ro/ocle/index.htm
  23. Y. Ledru, S. Dupuy-Chessa, and H. Fadil, “Towards computer-aided design of OCL constraints,” CAiSE'04 Workshops Proceedings, Vol.1, pp.329-338
  24. R. Harrison, S. Counsell, and R. Nithi, “An overview of object-oriented design metrics,” Software Technology and Engineering Practice, 1997. Proceedings., Eighth IEEE International Workshop on [incorporating Computer Aided Software Engineering], pp.230-235, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1109/STEP.1997.615494
  25. M. Xenos, D. Stavrinoudis, K. Zikouli et al., “Object-oriented metrics-a survey,” Proceedings of the FESMA 2000, Federation of European Software Measurement Associations, 2000
  26. M. Genero, M. Piattini-Velthuis, J. A. Cruz-Lemus et al., “Metrics for UML models,” UPGRADE, Vol.V, 2004
  27. M. G. Bocco, D. L. Moody, and M. Piattini, “Assessing the capability of internal metrics as early indicators of maintenance effort through experimentation,” J. Softw. Maint. Evol.: Res. Pract,Vol.17, pp.225-246, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1002/smr.v17:3
  28. R. C. Martin, Agile software development: principles, patterns, and practices: Prentice Hall PTR Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2003
  29. L. Reynoso, M. Genero, M. Piattini et al., “Assessing the impact of coupling on the understandability and modifiability of OCL expressions within UML/OCL combined models,” Software Metrics, 2005. 11th IEEE International Symposium, pp.14-14, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1109/METRICS.2005.12
  30. F. G. Wilkie, and T. J. Harmer, “Tool support for measuring complexity in heterogeneous object-oriented software,” Software Maintenance, 2002. Proceedings. International Conference on, pp.152-161, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSM.2002.1167762
  31. M. El-Wakil, A. El-Bastawisi, M. Riad et al., “A novel approach to formalize object-oriented design metrics,” in 9th International Conference on Empirical Assessment in Software Engineering 2005
  32. A. L. Baroni, S. Braz, and F. B. Abreu, “Using OCL to formalize object-oriented design metrics definitions,” ECOOP'02 Workshop on Quantitative Approaches in OO Software Engineering, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2002
  33. A. L. Baroni, and F. B. Abreu, “Formalizing object-oriented design metrics upon the UML meta-model,” Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering, Gramado-RS, Brazil, 2002
  34. A. L. Baroni, and F. B. e Abreu, “An OCL-based formalization of the moose metric suite,” 7th ECOOP Workshop on Quantitative Approaches in Object Oriented Software Engineering, 2003
  35. A. L. Baroni, and F. B. e Abreu, “A formal library for aiding metrics extraction,” International Workshop on Object-Oriented Re-Engineering at ECOOP, 2003
  36. E. H. Alikacem, Sahroui, H., “Generic metric extraction framework,” proceedings of the 16th International workshop on software measurement and Metrik Kongress pp.383-390, 2006
  37. SDMetrics. “SDMetrics v2.02,” http://www.sdmetrics.com/index.html
  38. M. Carbone, and G. Santucci, “Fast & serious: a UML based metric for effort estimation,” Proceedings of the 6th ECOOP Workshop on Quantitative Approaches in Object-Oriented Software Engineering (QAOOSE'02)
  39. H. Kim, and C. Boldyreff, “Developing software metrics applicable to UML models,” 6th ECOOP Workshop on Quantitative Approaches in Object-Oriented Software Engineering, 2002
  40. Objecteering. “Objecteering/metrics,” http://www.objecteering.com
  41. M. Clavel, and V. Torres, “MOVA: a tool for modeling, measuring and validating UML class diagrams,” Accepted in the Academic Posters and Demonstrations Session of MODELS 2007, 2007