臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

對為了解決複雜問題的大型軟體系統來說，其內部結構也是相對的複雜。為了掌握此複雜的結構，專家們提出了相當多的軟體工程方法和技術, 如元件為基礎的開發方式、設計模式、觀點導向編程等等。雖然有這些技術的輔助，大部份軟體開發者在設計系統解決問題，亦或學習應用最新的軟體開發技術時，仍需付出極大的精力。為了幫助軟體開發者選擇適當的設計決策及了解軟體系統內部複雜的結構關係，我們提出一個簡易的軟體設計輔助架構，能使用統一的元件模型來表達系統在不同的抽象層級及不同部分的軟體設計細節。根據此模型架構，我們開發了一個圖形化軟體設計註解及評估的輔助工具，能將軟體設計從不同的觀點及角度以圖形化的介面顯現出來。以此輔助工具為基礎，我們也開發出一套具彈性可客製化的軟體設計量測系統，以量化方式量測出發展過程中系統各部分設計的特徵及潛在的問題，作為系統進一步改進的依據。

Modern large-scale software systems bear complex internal structures to match the complexity of the problems they solve. To help coping with the structural complexity, numerous software engineering methods and techniques have been proposed and developed, including component-based development, design patterns, aspect-oriented programming, and so on. Despite these efforts, mastering software development skills in general and state-of-the-art techniques in particular continues to be a painstaking, try-and-error process for most, if not all, software developers. To help software developers make proper design decisions and/or understand the rationales behind complex software system design, we propose a simple conceptual framework in which software designs at various abstraction levels can be represented in terms of a generic component model that rests on the notion of polymorphism. In addition, we develop an assisting graphical annotation framework that is capable of visualizing various aspects of software designs, as well as a flexible metrics subsystem that can be customized to reveal design consistency in a more quantitative manner.

摘要 I
ABSTRACT II
誌謝 III
Table of Contents IV
List of Figures VI
Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION 1
Chapter 2. A GENERIC COMPONENT MODEL 5
2.1 Component and Interface 5
2.2 Domain, Context, and Polymorphism 6
2.3 Component Collaboration 7
2.4 Component Composition 8
2.5 Some Component-Oriented Design Guidelines 9
Chapter 3. A DESIGN ANNOTATION AND EVALUATION FRAMEWORK 12
3.1 Framework Overview 12
3.2 An XML-Based Language for Artifact Definition and Annotation 15
3.3 A Generic Graph Modeling Language 17
Chapter 4. METRICS SUBSYSTEM AND REFACTORING SUPPORT 20
4.1 Introduction to Metrics 21
4.2 The Metrics Subsystem 22
4.3 Metrics-driven Refactoring Support 24
4.4 Future Work for the Metrics Subsystem 26
Chapter 5. DISCUSSIONS AND RELATED WORK 28
Chapter 6. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK 31
Chapter 7. REFERENCES 33

[1] E. Gamma, R. Helm, R. Johnson, and J. Vlissides, “Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software,” Addison-Wesley, 1995.
[2] G. Kiczales, J. Lamping, A. Mendhekar, C. Maeda, C. V. Lopes, J.-M. Loingtier, and J. Irwin, “Aspect- oriented programming,” ECOOP'97 - Object-Oriented Programming 11th European Conference, 1997, pp. 220-242.
[3] C. Szyperski, “Component Software: Beyond Object-Oriented Programming,” Addison-Wesley, 1998
[4] A. W. Brown, K.C. Wallnau, “The current state of cbse. IEEE Software”, Sept.-Oct. 1998, 15(5):37-46.
[5] B. Meyer, “Object-Oriented Software Construction,” Prentice-Hall International, 1988.
[6] S. McConnell, “Code Complete: A Practical Handbook of Software Construction,” Microsoft express, 1993.
[7] M. Lanza and S. Ducasse. “A Categorization of Classes based on the Visualization of their Internal Structure: the Class Blueprint,” Proceedings of OOPSLA 01, pp. 300-311.
[8] R.J. Walker and G.C. Murphy. “Implicit Context; Easing Software Evolution and Reuse,” SIGSOFT 2000 (FSE 8), pp. 69-78.
[9] M. Mezini and K. Ostermann. “Integrating Independent Components with On-Demand Remodularization,” Proceedings of OOPSLA’02. Nov, 2002, pp. 52-67.
[10] K. Ostermann and M. Mezini. “Object-Oriented Composition Untangled,” Proceedings of OOPSLA 01, pp. 283-299.
[11] Softwaredioxide website, “http://www.softwaredioxide.com/Channels/FaqView.asp?id=164”
[12] S. R. Chidamber and C. F. Kemerer. “A metrics suite for object oriented design. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering,” 20(6), 1994, pp. 476-493.
[13] Basili, V. R., Briand, L. C., and Melo, W. L., “A validation of object-oriented design metrics as quality indicators,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 22(10), 1996 pp. 751-761.
[14] L. Etzkorn, J. Bansiya, and C. Davis, “Design and code complexity metrics for object-oriented classes,” Journal of Object Oriented Programming, 1999.
[15] W. Frakes, C. Terry, “Software Reuse: Metrics and Models. ACM Computing Surveys,” Vol. 28, No. 2, June 1996, pp. 415-435.
[16] L. Ott, B.K. Kang, B. Mehra, “Developing Measures of Class Cohesion for Object-Oriented Software,” 7th Annual Oregon Workshop on Software Metrics, June 1995.
[17] A. E. Giles and G. T. Daich, ”Metrics Tools,” http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/,” crosstalk Software Technology Support Center, Feb. 1995.
[18] sourceFORGE.net website, http://sourceforge.net/
[19] T. McCabe, “A software complexity measure,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 2(6), Dec. 1976, pp. 308-320.
[20] M. H. Halstead, “Elements of Software Science,” Elsevier, New York, 1977.
[21] A. J. Albrecht & J. E. Gaffney, Jr., “Software function, source lines of code, and development effort prediction: A software science validation,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. SE-9, 1983, pp. 639-648.
[22] Martin Fowler, “Refactoring. Improving the Design of Existing Code,” Addison Wesley, 2000.
[23] S. Demeyer, S. Ducasse, and O. Nierstrasz, ”Finding refactorings via change metrics,” In OOPSLA’ 2000, ACM Press 2000, pp. 166-177..
[24] S. Demeyer and S. Ducasse, “Metrics, Do They Really Help? ” Proceedings LMO'99, 1999, pp. 69-82.
[25] M. Lorenz and J. Kidd. Object-oriented software metrics: a practical guide, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1994.
[26] Y. Crespo, C. Lopez, E. Manso, and R Marticorena, “Language Independent Metric Support towards Refactoring Inference,” 9th ECOOP’05, pp. 18-29.
[27] F. Simon, F. Steinbruckner, C. Lewerentz, “Metrics Based Refactoring,” CSMR 2001, pp. 30-38.
[28] P. Baker al. Etc, “TRex – The Refactoring and Metrics Tool for TTCN-3 Test Specifications,” TAIC PART 2006 workshop, 2006.