Formal dynamic architecture description language

Ruan Jian Xue Bao/Journal of Software

Volumn 17, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 1349-1359

  Li, Chang Yun ^a,b   Li, Gan Sheng ^a   He, Pin Jie ^a  

^a ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b HUNAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (China)

Author keywords

ADL; Component; Dynamic behavior; High order multi type calculus; Software architecture

Indexed keywords

ARCHITECTURE; COMPONENTS; CONNECTORS (STRUCTURAL); SPECIFICATIONS;

ARCHITECTURE DESCRIPTION LANGUAGE (ADL); BEHAVIOR EQUIVALENCE; BEHAVIOR SIMULATION; COMPUTATION BEHAVIOR; DYNAMIC BEHAVIOR; HIGH ORDER MULTI TYPE PI CALCULUS; INTERACTION POINT; ONLINE EVOLUTION; SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE;

COMPUTER AIDED SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 33746859421     PISSN: 10009825     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1360/jos171349     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Oreizy P, Gorlick M, Taylor R. An architecture-based approach to self-adaptive software. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 1999,14(3):54-62.
2. Sun CA, Jin MZ, Liu C. Overviews on software architecture research. Journal of Software, 2002,13(7):1229-1237 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://www.jos.org.cn/1000-9825/13/1229.pdf
3. Mei H, Chen F, Feng YD, Yang J. ABC: An architecture based, component oriented approach to software development. Journal of Software, 2003,14(4):721-732 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://www.jos.org.cn/1000-9825/14/721.htm
4. Oquendo F. π-ADL: An architecture description language based on the higher-order typed π-calculus for specifying dynamic and mobile software architectures. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 2004,29(3):1-14.
5. Allen R. A formal approach to software architectures [Ph.D. Thesis]. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University, 1997.
6. Magee J, Kramer J, Giannakopoulou D. Behaviour analysis of software architectures. In: Donohoe P, ed. Proc. of the 1st Working IFIP Conf. on Software Architecture. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999. 35-50.
7. Milner R, Parrow J, Walker D. A calculus of mobile processes. Information and Computation, 1992,100(1):1-40.
8. Sangiorgi D. Expressing mobility in process algebras: First-Order and higher-order paradigms [Ph.D. Thesis]. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, 1992.
9. Li CY. Research on architecture-based software dynamic evolution [Ph.D. Thesis]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2005 (in Chinese with English abstract).
10. Victor B, Moller F. The mobility workbench: A tool for the π-calculus. In: Dill D, ed. Proc. of the 6th Int'l Conf. on Computer Aided Verfication. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1994. 428-440.
11. Dowling J, Cahill V, Clarke S. Dynamic software evolution and the k-component model. In: Northrop L, Vlissides J, eds. Workshop on Software Evolution, Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications 2001. New York: ACM Press, 2001.
12. Oreizy P, Medvidovic N, Taylor RN. Architecture-Based runtime software evolution. In: Nuseibeh B, ed. Proc. of the 2002 Int'l Conf. on Software Engineering. Washington: IEEE Computer Society Press, 1998. 177-186.
13. Luckham DC, Vera J. An event-based architecture definition language. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 1995,2(9):717-734.
14. Medvidovic N, Taylor RN. A framework for classifying and comparing architecture description languages. In: Bertolino A, eds. Proc. of the 6th European Software Engineering Conf. LNCS 1301, Springer-Verlag/ACM Press, 1997. 60-76.
15. Allen R, Douence R, Garlan D. Specifying and analyzing dynamic software architectures. In: Astesiano E, ed. Proc. of the Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering. LNCS 1382, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1998. 21-37.
16. Oquendo F, Warboys B, eds. ARCHWARE: Architecting evolvable software. In: Oquendo F, ed. 2004 European Workshop on Software Architecture. LNCS 3047, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2004. 257-271.