Should Future Variability Modeling Languages Express Constraints in OCL?

D. Batory
{"title":"Should Future Variability Modeling Languages Express Constraints in OCL?","authors":"D. Batory","doi":"10.1145/3307630.3342406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the mid-2000s, Propositional Logic (PL) has been the de facto language to express constraints in Feature Models (FMs) of Software Product Line (SPLs). PL was adequate because product configurations were formed by binary decisions including or not including features in a product. Inspired by both prior research and practical systems (eg., SPLs that use KConfig), future FMs must go beyond PL and admit numerical (and maybe even text) variables and their constraints. The Object Constraint Language (OCL) is a general-purpose declarative constraint language for Model Driven Engineering (MDE), which admits virtually any kind of variable and constraint in metamodels. We should expect future FMs to be examples of MDE metamodels. This raises a basic question: Should OCL be used to express constraints of future variability modeling language(s)? In this talk, I outline the pros and cons for doing so.","PeriodicalId":424711,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 23rd International Systems and Software Product Line Conference - Volume B","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 23rd International Systems and Software Product Line Conference - Volume B","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3307630.3342406","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Since the mid-2000s, Propositional Logic (PL) has been the de facto language to express constraints in Feature Models (FMs) of Software Product Line (SPLs). PL was adequate because product configurations were formed by binary decisions including or not including features in a product. Inspired by both prior research and practical systems (eg., SPLs that use KConfig), future FMs must go beyond PL and admit numerical (and maybe even text) variables and their constraints. The Object Constraint Language (OCL) is a general-purpose declarative constraint language for Model Driven Engineering (MDE), which admits virtually any kind of variable and constraint in metamodels. We should expect future FMs to be examples of MDE metamodels. This raises a basic question: Should OCL be used to express constraints of future variability modeling language(s)? In this talk, I outline the pros and cons for doing so.
未来的可变性建模语言应该在OCL中表达约束吗?
自2000年代中期以来,命题逻辑(PL)已经成为软件产品线(SPLs)特征模型(FMs)中表达约束的事实上的语言。PL是足够的,因为产品配置是由包含或不包含产品特性的二元决策形成的。受到先前研究和实际系统的启发(例如。未来的fm必须超越PL,并承认数字(甚至可能是文本)变量及其约束。对象约束语言(OCL)是一种用于模型驱动工程(MDE)的通用声明性约束语言,它实际上允许元模型中的任何类型的变量和约束。我们应该期待未来的fm成为MDE元模型的例子。这就提出了一个基本问题:OCL应该用来表达未来可变性建模语言的约束吗?在这次演讲中,我将概述这样做的利弊。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信