Skip to main content

On the Precise Meaning of OCL Constraints

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Object Modeling with the OCL

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2263))

Abstract

When OCL is applied in concrete examples, many questions arise about the precise meaning of OCL constraints. The same kind of difficulties appears when automatic support tools for OCL are designed. These questions are due to the lack of a precise semantics of OCL constraints in the context of a UML model. The aim of this paper is to contribute to a clarification of several issues, like interpretation of invariants and pre- and postconditions, treatment of undefined values, inheritance of constraints, transformation rules for OCL constraints and computation of proof obligations. Our study is based on a formal, abstract semantics of OCL.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bidoit, M., Hennicker, R., Tort, F., Wirsing, M.: Correct Realizations of Interface Constraints with OCL. Proc. UML’ 99, The Unified Modeling Language-Beyond the Standard, Springer LNCS 1723, 399–415, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brickford, M., Guaspari, D.: Lightweight Analysis of UML. Draft Technical Report, Odyssey Research Associates, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cheesman, J., Daniels, J.: UML Components. Addison-Wesley, 2001

    Google Scholar 

  4. The CIP Language Group (F.L. Bauer et al.): The Munich Project CIP, Vol. I: The Wide Spectrum Language CIP-L. Springer LNCS 183, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  5. Demuth, B., Hussmann, H.: Using UML/OCL Constraints for Relational Database Design. Proc. UML’ 99, The Unified Modeling Language-Beyond the Standard, Springer LNCS 1723, 598–613, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Demuth, B., Hussmann, H., Loecher, St.: OCL as a Specification Language for Business Rules in Data Base Applications. Proc. UML’ 01, The Unified Modeling Language, To appear (Springer LNCS), 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  7. D’souza, D.F., Wills, A.C.: Objects, Components and Frameworks with UML. The Catalysis Approach. Addison-Wesley, 1999

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fitzgerald, J., Larsen, P.G.: Modelling Systems. Practical Tools and Techniques in Software Development. Cambridge University Press, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  9. Floyd, R.W.: Assinging Meanings to Programs. Proc. Symp. on Appl. Math. 19, American Mathematical Society 1967

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., Vlissides, J.: Design Patterns. Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-Wesley, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  11. Reus, B., Wirsing, M., Hennicker, R.: A Hoare Calculus for Verifying Java Realizations of OCL-Constrained Design Models. Proc. FASE 2001-Fundamental Aspects of Software Engineering, Springer LNCS 2029, 285–300, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hoare, C.A.R.: An Axiomatic Basis of Computer Programming. Communications of the ACM 12, pp. 576–583, 1969

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Hussmann, H., Demuth, B., Finger, F.: Modular Architecture for a Toolset Supporting OCL. Proc. UML 2000, The Unified Modeling Language-Advancing the Standard, Springer LNCS 1939, 278–293, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Liskov, B., Wing, J.: A Behavioral Notion of Subtyping. ACM Trans. on Prog. Lang. and Systems, Vol. 16 (6), 1811–1841, 1994

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Meyer, B.: Object-oriented Software Construction. Prentice Hall, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Richters, M., Gogolla, M.: On Formalizing the UML Object Constraint Language OCL. Proc. 17th Int. Conf. Conceptual Modeling (ER’ 98) Springer LNCS 1507, 449–464, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Richters, M., Gogolla, M.: Validating UML Models and OCL Constraints. Proc. UML 2000, The Unified Modeling Language-Advancing the Standard, Springer LNCS 1939, 265–277, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Warmer, J., Kleppe, A.: The Object Constraint Language. Precise Modeling with UML. Addison-Wesley, 1999

    Google Scholar 

  19. Klasse Objecten: Errata for “The Object Constraint Language, Precise Modeling with UML”. Available at http://www.klasse.nl.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hennicker, R., Hussmann, H., Bidoit, M. (2002). On the Precise Meaning of OCL Constraints. In: Clark, T., Warmer, J. (eds) Object Modeling with the OCL. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2263. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45669-4_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45669-4_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-43169-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45669-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics