Software reflexion models: bridging the gap between design and implementation

Abstract

ÐThe artifacts constituting a software system often drift apart over time. We have developed the software reflexion model technique to help engineers perform various software engineering tasks by exploitingÐrather than removingÐthe drift between design and implementation. More specifically, the technique helps an engineer compare artifacts by summarizing where one artifact (such as a design) is consistent with and inconsistent with another artifact (such as source). The technique can be applied to help a software engineer evolve a structural mental model of a system to the point that it is ªgood-enoughº to be used for reasoning about a task at hand. The software reflexion model technique has been applied to support a variety of tasks, including design conformance, change assessment, and an experimental reengineering of the million-lines-of-code Microsoft Excel product. In this paper, we provide a formal characterization of the reflexion model technique, discuss practical aspects of the approach, relate experiences of applying the approach and tools, and place the technique into the context of related work. Fig. 2. (a) High-level and (b) reflexion models for the NetBSD virtual memory subsystem.

Real-Time Reflexion Modelling in architecture reconciliation: A multi case study

“…While Knodel et al [52] and Kolb et al [19] report that violations were addressed in their case study, Rosik et al [20] found that they were not. Other studies have reported that only academic researchers removed identified violations [15,21]. In this study, some were removed but the majority remained.…”

“…In one of the first case-studies reported, Murphy et al compared the layered (intended) architecture of a program restructuring tool with the actual implementation (implemented architecture) [15]. In another case-study presented in the same paper, RM was applied to the kernel of an experimental operating system developed at the University of Washington.…”

“…An improved version of their technique has been used in another case-study of a Simulation and Analysis Tool [16]. However, as in the original study in this area [15], the violations identified in these evaluations were again addressed by members of the research team, who were also the authors of the system under study.…”

“…The second category allows the architect to declare their desired architectural model, either graphically [15] and/or through the definition of individual rules [33,[40][41]. Semmle, for example, uses a Source Code Query Language (SCQL) called .QL which, while expressive in defining constraints, is limited in its architecture-visualizing ability and thus its ability to guide reasoning about overall software architecture abstractions [42].…”

“…Several implementations of RM variants have been empirically evaluated through case studies [15][16][17][18], largely achieving positive feedback from industrial practitioners. Specifically, software architects have shown great enthusiasm for the information which it provides [13,19] and have even proactively sought such analysis again [20].…”