Managing the component-based software engineering with metrics

Dumke, Reiner R.; Winkler, Achim

doi:10.1109/ast.1997.599920

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is more so for software components, which do not have information on their source code. Most other metrics on CBSE have aimed at the reusability of components [13,22,30,31], while [11,23] focus on the process and measurement framework in developing software components. Ebert [12] suggests some classification techniques to identify critical items in software project, which can be applied for a CBSE project, but he does not tackle the criticality aspects of component integration.…”

Section: Research Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some theoretical considerations for a suite of metrics for the integration of software components

Narasimhan

Hendradjaya

2007

Information Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Research Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some theoretical considerations for a suite of metrics for the integration of software components

Narasimhan

Hendradjaya

2007

Information Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In other words, software objects are measured in terms of quantitative values rather than qualitative ones. Over the years, various software measures have been proposed and classified into three major classes: process measures, product measures and resource measures [11].…”

Section: Software Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

CoMet: A Tool Using CUMM to Measure Unused Component Members

Msheik¹,

Abran²,

Mcheick³

et al. 2006

IEEE International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications, 2006.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software component technology has become a major pillar of the IT evolution. The benefits of this technology, such as reuse, enhanced quality and relatively short application development time, have been key drivers of its industrial adoption. However, in its progress towards maturity, component technology has suffered from a number of limitations, such as unused component members (data and functionalities). For instance, a reusable software component incorporates a set of members, a sizevarying subset of which is actually used to satisfy the functional requirements of a particular software application. This means that a complementary subset of unused members will persist in the deployed application, where this subset provides no functional value to the host application. Furthermore, these unused members can consume memory and network resources and might compromise application integrity and/or security if they are exploited inappropriately. In this paper, we propose CoMet, a prototype tool which applies CUMM (Component Unused Member Measurement) method to measure unused component members (attributes and functionalities) and their usage percentages in a software application.

show abstract

“…There has not been a rigorous analysis nor any empirical data on how any one mechanism is used by a project manager to achieve multiple objectives. Research to date has investigated project control (Zmud, 1980;Henderson and Lee, 1992;Kirsch, 1996;Addison and Vallabh, 2002;Choudhury and Sabherwal, 2003) or project monitoring (Kitchenham, 1996;Dumke and Winkler, 1997;Royce, 1998;Kitchenham et al, 2001) or project coordination (Kraut and Streeter, 1995;Crowston and Kammerer, 1998;Faraj and Sproull, 2000;Andres and Zmud, 2002;Sabherwal, 2003) and has identified the mechanisms employed to achieve each separate objective. But many of the same mechanisms used for project control, for example, are also used to achieve project coordination.…”

Section: Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The mechanisms of project management of software development

McBride

2008

Journal of Systems and Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The changing environments of software development such as componentbased, distributed and outsourced software development require matching changes by project managers to monitor, control and coordinate their projects. While the objectives of project management may be well established, the mechanisms with which those objectives are achieved are less well known. An empirical study was undertaken to investigate which mechanisms were used by practising project managers to monitor, control and coordinate software development projects. First, the types of mechanisms are discussed so that the mechanisms can be classified usefully. Then, the design of the empirical study is described. The data were collected through structured interview, which provided both quantitative and qualitative data. The data are analysed for each mechanism separately and the findings presented. The study found that project managers use multiple mechanisms to achieve project management objectives and use the same mechanism to serve multiple objectives. Further research is suggested to investigate project management from the opposite orientation, that is, which objectives are served by specific project management mechanisms.

show abstract

Managing the component-based software engineering with metrics

Cited by 11 publications

References 6 publications

Some theoretical considerations for a suite of metrics for the integration of software components

Some theoretical considerations for a suite of metrics for the integration of software components

CoMet: A Tool Using CUMM to Measure Unused Component Members

The mechanisms of project management of software development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About