Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Towards Automating Source-Consistent UML Refactorings

  • Conference paper
«UML» 2003 - The Unified Modeling Language. Modeling Languages and Applications (UML 2003)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2863))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

With the increased interest in refactoring, UML tool vendors seek ways to support software developers in applying a (sequence of) refactoring(s). The problem with such tools is that the UML metamodel – on which their repository is based – is inadequate to maintain the consistency between the model and the code while one of them gets refactored. Therefore, we propose a set of minimal extensions to the UML metamodel, which is sufficient to reason about refactoring for all common OO languages. For instance, by specifying pre- and postconditions in OCL, we are able to compose primitive refactorings, verify preservation of program behavior, and trigger refactorings based on code smells. This way, we provide future MDA tools with the ability to improve existing UML designs, yet keeping them in synch with the underlying code base.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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. Lientz, B.P., Swanson, E.B.: Software maintenance management: a study of the maintenance of computer application software in 487 data processing organizations. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Guimaraes, T.: Managing application program maintenance expenditure. Comm. ACM 26(10), 739–746 (1983)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Nosek, J.T., Palvia, P.: Software maintenance management: changes in the last decade. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice 2, 157–174 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hanna, M.: Maintenance burden begging for a remedy. Datamation, 53–63 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Glass, R.L.: Maintenance: Less is not more. IEEE Software (July/August 1998)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Arnold, R.S.: An introduction to software restructuring, pp. 228–269. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Griswold, W.G.: Program Restructuring as an Aid to Software Maintenance. PhD thesis, University of Washington (August 1991)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Opdyke, W.F.: Refactoring: A Program Restructuring Aid in Designing Object-Oriented Application Frameworks. PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fowler, M.: Refactoring - Improving the Design of Existing Code. Addison Wesley, Reading (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Wells, D., Williams, L.A. (eds.): XP 2002. LNCS, vol. 2418. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Extreme Programming and Flexible Processes in Software Engineering (XP 2003) (May 2003), http://www.xp2003.org/

  12. Object Management Group. Model Driven Architecture (MDA), document number ormsc/2001-07-01 (July 2001)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Object Management Group. Unified Modeling Language (UML), version 1.4 (September 2001)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Interactive Objects. ArcStyler (March 2003), http://www.arcstyler.com/

  15. Compuware. OptimalJ (March 2003), http://www.compuware.com/products/optimalj/

  16. Object Management Group. Unified Modeling Language (UML), version 1.5 (March 2003)

    Google Scholar 

  17. U2 Partners. 3rd revised submission to OMGRFP ad/00-09-01: Unified Modeling Language: Infrastructure, version 2.0 (January 2003), http://www.u2-partners.org/

  18. 2U Consortium. Unambiguous UML (2U) 3rd revised submission to UML 2 infrastructure RFP (January 2003), http://www.2uworks.org/

  19. Tourwé, T., Mens, T.: Identifying refactoring opportunities using logic meta programming. In: Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  20. van Emden, E., Moonen, L.: Java quality assurance by detecting code smells. In: Proceedings of the 9th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Demeyer, S., Tichelaar, S., Steyaert, P.: FAMIX 2.0 – the FAMOOS information exchange model (September 1999), http://www.iam.unibe.ch/famoos/FAMIX/

  22. Mens, T., Van Eetvelde, N., Janssens, D., Demeyer, S.: Formalising refactorings with graph transformations. Fundamenta Informaticae (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  23. van Rysselberghe, F., Demeyer, S.: Evaluating clone detection techniques. In: International Workshop on Evolution of Large-scale Industrial Software Applications (ELISA) 2003 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Roberts, D.B.: Practical Analysis for Refactoring. PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Baroni, A.L.: Formal definition of object-oriented design metrics. Master’s thesis, Vrije Universiteit Brussel - Belgium and Faculty of Sciences in Collaboration with Ecole des Mines de Nantes - France and Universidade Nova de Lisboa - Portugal (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Software Engineering Institute. Cyclomatic complexity, http://www.sei.cmu.edu/str/descriptions/cyclomatic_body.html

  27. Sunyé, G., Pollet, D., Le Traon, Y., Jézéquel, J.-M.: Refactoring UML models. In: Gogolla, M., Kobryn, C. (eds.) UML 2001. LNCS, vol. 2185, pp. 134–148. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Van Der Straeten, R., Simmonds, J., Mens, T.: Using description logic to maintain consistency between UML models. In: Stevens, P., Whittle, J., Booch, G. (eds.) UML 2003. LNCS, vol. 2863, pp. 326–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Mens, T., Lucas, C., Steyaert, P.: Supporting disciplined reuse and evolution of uml models. In: Bézivin, J., Muller, P.-A. (eds.) UML 1998. LNCS, vol. 1618, pp. 378–392. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Mens, T., D’Hondt, T.: Automating support for software evolution in uml. Automated Software Engineering Journal 7(1), 39–59 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mens, T., Demeyer, S., Bois, B.D., Stenten, H., Van Gorp, P.: Refactoring: Current research and future trends. In: Language Descriptions, Tools and Applications, LDTA (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Bergstein, P.L.: Maintenance of object-oriented systems during structural evolution. Theory and Practice of Object Systems 3(3), 185–212 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lab on Re-Engineering, University of Antwerp, Belgium

    Pieter Van Gorp, Hans Stenten & Serge Demeyer

  2. Service de Génie Logiciel, Université de Mons-Hainaut, Belgium

    Tom Mens

Authors
  1. Pieter Van Gorp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hans Stenten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tom Mens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Serge Demeyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh,  

    Perdita Stevens

  2. Computing Department - InfoLab21, Lancaster University, LA1 4WA, Lancaster, UK

    Jon Whittle

  3. IBM Rational, P.O. Box 9027, CO 80301-9027, Boulder, USA

    Grady Booch

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Van Gorp, P., Stenten, H., Mens, T., Demeyer, S. (2003). Towards Automating Source-Consistent UML Refactorings. In: Stevens, P., Whittle, J., Booch, G. (eds) «UML» 2003 - The Unified Modeling Language. Modeling Languages and Applications. UML 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2863. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45221-8_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45221-8_15

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-20243-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45221-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation