Program Transformation: What, How, and Why

Winter, Victor

doi:10.1002/9780470050118.ecse330

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(3) The dimensions of software change in the context of software evolution and maintenance (Buckley et al, 2003;Benestad et al, 2009). By comparing taxonomies of Benestad et al (2009), Buckley et al (2003) with the ones of Visser (2001), Winter (2004), we conclude that two terms (i.e., change and transformation) define the same issue but from different perspectives and scope (e.g., development and evolution). The following observation is important to state in this context: the nature of software evolution now is shifting to "a continuous process, in which there's no neat boundary between development and evolution" (Boehm, 2010).…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Equivalent Transformations of Heterogeneous Meta-Programs

Štuikys¹,

Damaševičius²

2013

Informatica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We consider a generalization of heterogeneous meta-programs by ( 1) introducing an extra level of abstraction within the meta-program structure, and (2) meta-program transformations. We define basic terms, formalize transformation tasks, consider properties of meta-program transformations and rules to manage complexity through the following transformation processes:(1) reverse transformation, when a correct one-stage meta-program M 1 is transformed into the equivalent two-stage meta-meta-program M 2 ; (2) two-stage forward transformations, when M 2 is transformed into a set of meta-programs, and each meta-program is transformed into a set of target programs. The results are as follows: (a) formalization of the transformation processes within the heterogeneous meta-programming paradigm; (b) introduction and approval of equivalent transformations of meta-programs into meta-meta-programs and vice versa; (c) introduction of metrics to evaluate complexity of meta-specifications. The results are approved by examples, theoretical reasoning and experiments.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…(1) The levels of abstraction before and after transformation, and preservation of semantics during transformation (Visser, 2001). The semantics-preserving changes correspond to the well-known concept of software re-factoring (Fowler, 1999;Winter, 2004).…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Equivalent Transformations of Heterogeneous Meta-Programs

Štuikys¹,

Damaševičius²

2013

Informatica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The key to study these approaches is first to look at the program transformation taxonomy [Win04] and model transformation taxonomy [MCG06]. This is left as a separate research topic.…”

Section: Reuse As a Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Reuse Framework of the LO Domain

Štuikys

2015

Smart Learning Objects for Smart Education in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Visser [13] presents a taxonomy that considers two major groups of transformations: translation and rephrasing. Winter [38] identifies seven major bidirectional goals of program transformation: clarity, efficiency, computability, simplicity, functionality, translation, and computation. Cordy and Sarkar [18] demonstrate that meta-programs can be derived from higher-level specifications using second order source transformations.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Refactoring of Heterogeneous Meta-Program into k-stage Meta-Program

Štuikys

Bespalova

Burbaitė

2014

ITC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper presents: (1) a graph-based theoretical background to refactoring a correct heterogeneous meta-program into its k-stage representation; (2) the refactoring method; (3) refactoring experiments with tasks taken from different domains, including real world tasks, such as meta-programs to teach Computer Science (CS) topics using educational robots. Refactoring meta-programs by staging enables to flexibly adapt them to the different context of use. To do that (semi-)automatically, we use the contextual information as a priority relation (e.g. highest, lowest, etc.) introduced within the meta-program specification. We implement the refactoring method using the so-called activating/de-activating label (index) to change the role of metalanguage constructs at different stages. The contribution of the paper is: (1) applying the known (in programming) staging concept to heterogeneous metaprogramming; (2) a theoretical background, properties and the method to solve tasks of this kind of refactoring.

show abstract

Program Transformation: What, How, and Why

Abstract: Transformation can be viewed as a philosophy on how to achieve change. A rigorous treatment of transformation has its roots in equational reasoning —the idea that equals can be substituted for equals. This article explores transformation as it applies to the manipulation of software.

Cited by 4 publications

References 19 publications

Equivalent Transformations of Heterogeneous Meta-Programs

Equivalent Transformations of Heterogeneous Meta-Programs

Reuse Framework of the LO Domain

Refactoring of Heterogeneous Meta-Program into k-stage Meta-Program

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About