Extraction and use of class dependency information for Java

Barowski, Larry A.; Cross, James H.

doi:10.1109/wcre.2002.1173088

Cited by 18 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Tools and research artifacts which rely on the analysis of program source code are abundant in the software world, including metrics [20] tools, reverse-engineering [10], smart CASE enhancements [47], configuration management [11], architecture discovery [37], requirement tracing [38], AOP) [53], software porting and migration [54], program annotation [3], and many more.…”

Section: Discussion and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

JTL

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present an overview of JTL (the Java Tools Language, pronounced "Gee-tel"), a novel language for querying JAVA [8] programs. JTL was designed to serve the development of source code software tools for JAVA, and as a small language to aid programming language extensions to JAVA. Applications include definition of pointcuts for aspect-oriented programming, fixing type constraints for generic programming, specification of encapsulation policies, definition of micro-patterns, etc. We argue that the JTL expression of each of these is systematic, concise, intuitive and general.JTL relies on a simply-typed relational database for program representation, rather than an abstract syntax tree. The underlying semantics of the language is restricted to queries formulated in First Order Predicate Logic augmented with transitive closure ( FOPL * ).Special effort was taken to ensure terse, yet readable expression of logical conditions. The JTL pattern public abstract class, for example, matches all abstract classes which are publicly accessible, while class { public clone(); } matches all classes in which method clone is public. To this end, JTL relies on a DATALOG-like syntax and semantics, enriched with quantifiers and pattern matching which all but entirely eliminate the need for recursive calls.JTL's query analyzer gives special attention to the fragility of the "closed world assumption" in examining JAVA software, and determines whether a query relies on such an assumption.The performance of the JTL interpreter is comparable to that of JQuery after it generated its database cache, and at least an order of magnitude faster when the cache has to be rebuilt. public abstract void () matches all methods (of a given class) which are abstract, publicly accessible, return void and take no parameters. Thus, in a sense, JTL mimics the Query By Example [80] idea.As in the logic paradigm, a JTL program is a set of predicate definitions, one of which is marked as the program goal.Even patterns which transcend the plain JAVA syntax should be understandable, e.g., abstract class { [long | int] field; no abstract method; } matches abstract classes in which there is a field whose type is either long or int and no abstract methods.The first line in the curly brackets is an existential quantifier ranging over all class members. The second line in the brackets is a negation of an existential quantifier, i.e., a universal quantifier in disguise, applied to this range.JTL can also delve into method bodies, by means of intraprocedural dataflow analysis, similar to that of the class file verifier. Consider for example cascading methods, i.e., methods which can be used in a cascade of message sends to the same receiver, as in the following JAVA statement (new MyClass()).f().g().h(); in which f, g and h are methods of MyClass. Then, the following JTL pattern matches all cascading methods:The curly brackets in the above pattern denote the set of values (including temporaries, parameters, constants, etc.) that the method may generate or use. The s...

show abstract

Section: Discussion and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

JTL

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both of the target systems in this case study are implemented using the Java programming language. Here, like in many object oriented languages, direct references and inheritances create dependencies to public interfaces formed out of variables and methods [2].…”

Section: Technical Debt In Software Implementationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining Technical Debt Accumulation in Software Implementations

Holvitie¹,

Leppänen²

2015

IJSEIA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The scientific literature is rich with techniques and tools, most of which use static approaches to reverse engineering class models from the code [19,4,6,10,13,9]. However, a class model contains some dynamic constraints whose implementation is hard to be statically verified.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Runtime Checking of UML Association-Related Constraints

Wang

Shen

2007

Fifth International Workshop on Dynamic Analysis (WODA '07)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

UML class models are important design artifacts used as blueprints of software systems to be built. Yet, implementations are often inconsistent with their models. Although many techniques have been proposed to tackle this problem, some dynamic aspects of a class model are still hard to be verified using existing techniques. In this paper, we present an approach to checking the UML association-related constraints during a program's execution. Our approach instruments event notification mechanism into Java bytecode and verifies the constraints imposed by design-level associations (including compositions), when certain events occur. The empirical studies show that our approach can help efficiently detect inconsistencies between a UML class model and its implementation.

show abstract

Extraction and use of class dependency information for Java

Cited by 18 publications

References 0 publications

JTL

JTL

Examining Technical Debt Accumulation in Software Implementations

Runtime Checking of UML Association-Related Constraints

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About