Finding high-level structures in spreadsheet programs

Proceedings - Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, WCRE

Volumn 2002-January, Issue , 2002, Pages 221-232

  Mittermeir, Roland ^a   Clermont, Markus ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KLAGENFURT   (Austria)

Author keywords

Application software; Computer industry; Computer languages; Documentation; Microcomputers; Production; Prototypes; Software engineering; Software maintenance; Spreadsheet programs

Indexed keywords

ABSTRACTING; APPLICATION PROGRAMS; COMPUTER PROGRAMMING; COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES; COMPUTER SOFTWARE; COMPUTERS; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; MAINTENANCE; MICROCOMPUTERS; PRODUCTION; REVERSE ENGINEERING; SEMANTICS; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; SOFTWARE PROTOTYPING; SPREADSHEETS; SYSTEM PROGRAM DOCUMENTATION;

COMPUTER INDUSTRY; END USER PROGRAMMING; HIGH-LEVEL STRUCTURE; LEVELS OF ABSTRACTION; MAINTENANCE CYCLES; PROTOTYPES; SEMANTIC CLASS; SPREADSHEET PROGRAM;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE;

EID: 84952886542     PISSN: 10951350     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/WCRE.2002.1173080     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. Y. Ayalew. Spreadsheet Testing Using Interval Analysis. PhD thesis, Universität Klagenfurt, Universitätsstrasse 65-67, A-9020 Klagenfurt, Austria, November 2001.
2. Y. Ayalew, M. Clermont, and R. Mittermeir. Detecting errors in spreadsheets. In Spreadsheet Risks, Audit and Development Methods, volume 1, pages 51-62, AAAAAA, 7 2000. EuSpRIG, University of Greenwich.
3. K. H. Bennett and V. T. Rajlich. Software Maintenance and Evolution: A Roadmap. In A. Finkelstein, editor, The Future of Software Engineering, pages 73-87. ACM Press, 2000.
4. R. Casimir. Real programmers don't use spreadsheets. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 27(6):10-16, June 1992.
5. H. C. Chan and Y. Chen. Visual checking of spreadsheets. In Spreadsheet Risks, Audit and Development Methods, volume 1, pages 75-85. EuSpRIG, University of Greenwich, 7 2000.
6. M. Clermont, C. Hanin, and R. Mittermeir. A Spreadsheet Auditing Tool Evaluated in an Industrial Context. In Spreadsheet Risks, Audit and Development Methods, volume 3, pages 35-46. EUSPRIG, 7 2002.
7. J. S. Davis. Tools for spreadsheet auditing. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(4):429-442, 1996.
8. G. Filby, editor. Spreadsheets in Science and Engineering. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1998.
9. G. W. Furnas. Generalized fisheye views. In Conference proceedings on Human factors in computing systems, pages 16-23. ACM, April 1986.
10. T. Isakowitz, S. Shocken, and H. C. Lucas. Toward a Logical/Physical Theory of Spreadsheet Modeling. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 13(1):1-37, 1995.
11. D. Janvrin and J. Morrison. Using a structured design approach to reduce risks in End user spreadsheet development. Information and Management, 37:1-12, 2000.
12. B. Knight, D. Chadwick, and K. Rajalingham. A structured methodology for spreadsheet modelling. In Spreadsheet Risks, Audit and Development Methods, volume 1, pages 43-50. EuSpRIG, University of Greenwich, 7 2000.
13. P. Kokol. Some Applications of Spreadsheet Programs in Software Engineering. Software Engineering Notes, 12(3):45-50, July 1987.
14. R. Mittermeir, M. Clermont, and Y. Ayalew. User Centered Approaches for Improving Spreadsheet Quality. Technical Report TR-ISYS-MCA-1, Institut für Informatik-Systeme, Universität Klagenfurt, July 2000.
15. H. Müller, K. Wong, and S. Tilley. Understanding Software Systems Using Reverse Engineering Technology. In Colloquium on Object Orientation in Databases and Software Engineering, volume 62. Association Canadienne Francaise pour l'Avancement des Sciences (ACFAS), 1994.
16. B. Nardi and J. Miller. An Ethnographic Study of Distributed Problem Solving in Spreadsheet Development. In Proceedings of the conference on Computer-supported cooperative work, pages 197-208. ACM, October 1990.
17. J. Paine. MODEL MASTER: Making Spreadsheets Safe. In Proceedings of CALECO97. CTI, 1997.
18. J. Paine. Web-O-Matic: using System Limit Programming in a declarative object-oriented language for building complex interactive Web applications. In Proceedings of the 8th REXX Symposium. IBM, 1997.
19. R. Panko and R. P. Halverson. Are Two Heads Better than One? (At Reducing Errors in Spreadsheet Modeling). Office Systems Research Journal, 1997.
20. R. R. Panko. What we know about spreadsheet errors. Journal of End User Computing: Special issue on Scaling Up End User Development, 10(2):15-21, Spring 1998.
21. R. R. Panko and R. P. Halverson, Jr. Spreadsheets on trial: A survey of research on spreadsheet risks. Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, January 2-5 1996.
22. J. Reichwein, G. Rothermel, and M. Burnett. Slicing spreadsheets: An integrated methodology for spreadsheet testing and debugging. In Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on domain-specific languages, volume 2, pages 25-38. ACM, 2000.
23. B. Ronen, M. Palley, and H. Lucas. Spreadsheet analysis and design. Communication of the ACM, 32(1):84-93, January 1989.
24. G. Rothermel, L. Li, C. DuPuis, and M. Burnett. What you see is what you test: A methodology for testing form-based visual programs. In ICSE 1998 Proceedings, volume 20, pages 198-207. IEEE, April 1998.
25. K. Rothermel, C. Cook, M. Burnett, J. Schonfeld, T. Green, and G. Rothermel. Wysiwyt testing in the spreadsheet paradigm: An empirical evaluation. In ICSE 2000 Proceedings, pages 230-239. ACM, 2000.
26. J. Sajaniemi. Modeling spreadsheet audit: A rigorous approach to automatic visualization. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 11(1):49-82, 2000.
27. M. Stadelmann. A Spreadsheet Based on Constraints. In Proceedings of the sixth annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, pages 217-224. ACM, ACM, November 1993.
28. S. Tilley, H. Müller, and M. Orgun. Documenting Software Systems with Views. In Proceedings of the SIGDOC'92, pages 211-219. ACM, 1992.