Skip to main content

Understanding Variability Abstraction and Realization

  • Conference paper
Top Productivity through Software Reuse (ICSR 2011)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 6727))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 825 Accesses

Abstract

Software product line engineering (SPLE) emerged as a successful software reuse paradigm. The essence of SPLE is the process of factoring out commonalities and systematizing variabilities, that is, differences, among the products in a SPL. In this talk, I will take the position that this process is the very act of abstraction. Thus, as suggested by Coplien et al. [8], the purpose of abstraction mechanisms, such as subroutines and inheritance in programming languages and architectural patterns and platforms in architectural design, is to support factoring out commonalities and making variabilities explicit.

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

References

  1. Apel, S., Lengauer, C., Möller, B., Kästner, C.: An algebra for features and feature composition. In: Bevilacqua, V., Roşu, G. (eds.) AMAST 2008. LNCS, vol. 5140, pp. 36–50. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Bąk, K., Czarnecki, K., Wąsowski, A.: Feature and meta-models in clafer: Mixed, specialized, and coupled. In: Malloy, B., Staab, S., van den Brand, M. (eds.) SLE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6563, pp. 102–122. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Batory, D., Sarvela, J.N., Rauschmayer, A.: Scaling step-wise refinement. IEEE TSE 30, 355–371 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Benavides, D., Segura, S., Ruiz-Cortés, A.: Automated analysis of feature models 20 years later: a literature review. Information Systems 35(6) (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Berger, T., She, S., Lotufo, R., WÄ…sowski, A., Czarnecki, K.: Variability modeling in the real: a perspective from the operating systems domain. In: ASE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Clarke, D., Helvensteijn, M., Schaefer, I.: Abstract delta modeling. In: GPCE 2010 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Classen, A., Heymans, P., Schobbens, P.Y., Legay, A., Raskin, J.F.: Model checking lots of systems: efficient verification of temporal properties in software product lines. In: ICSE, pp. 335–344 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Coplien, J., Hoffman, D., Weiss, D.: Commonality and variability in software engineering. IEEE Softw. 15, 37–45 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Czarnecki, K., Pietroszek, K.: Verifying feature-based model templates against well-formedness OCL constraints. In: GPCE 2006 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Czarnecki, K., Antkiewicz, M.: Mapping features to models: A template approach based on superimposed variants. In: Glück, R., Lowry, M. (eds.) GPCE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3676, pp. 422–437. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Czarnecki, K., Eisenecker, U.W.: Generative programming: methods, tools, and applications. ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Czarnecki, K., Peter Kim, C.H., Kalleberg, K.T.: Feature models are views on ontologies. In: SPLC (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Erwig, M., Walkingshaw, E.: The choice calculus: A representation for software variation. In: ACM TOSEM (to appear, 2011)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Haugen, O., Møller-Pedersen, B., Oldevik, J., Olsen, G.K., Svendsen, A.: Adding standardized variability to domain specific languages. In: SPLC (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kang, K., Cohen, S., Hess, J., Nowak, W., Peterson, S.: Feature-oriented domain analysis (FODA) feasibility study. Tech. Rep. CMU/SEI-90-TR-21, CMU (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kästner, C.: Virtual Separation of Concerns: Toward Preprocessors 2.0. Ph.D. thesis, University of Magdeburg (May 2010)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kästner, C., Apel, S., Thüm, T., Saake, G.: Type checking annotation-based product lines. In: ACM TOSEM (to appear, 2011)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Object Management Group: Common variability language (CVL) RFP. Document ad/2009-12-03 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Schmid, K., Rabiser, R., Grünbacher, P.: A comparison of decision modeling approaches in product lines. In: VaMoS, pp. 119–126 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  20. She, S., Lotufo, R., Berger, T., Wasowski, A., Czarnecki, K.: The variability model of the Linux kernel. In: VaMoS, pp. 45–51 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Veldhuizen, T.L.: Parsimony principles for software components and metalanguages. In: GPCE (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Voelter, M., Groher, I.: Product line implementation using aspect-oriented and model-driven software development. In: SPLC (2007)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Czarnecki, K. (2011). Understanding Variability Abstraction and Realization. In: Schmid, K. (eds) Top Productivity through Software Reuse. ICSR 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6727. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21347-2_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21347-2_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-21346-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-21347-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics