Survey on software architecture design approaches and tools
Software architecture provides a powerful way to manage the complexity of large software systems. Software architecture can help people to better understand the total structure of the system. It has emerged as a distinct form of abstraction for software systems with its own set of design issues, voc...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Final Year Project (FYP) |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/10356/59005 |
| _version_ | 1824456234644799488 |
|---|---|
| author | Rekha Kemburaju |
| author2 | School of Computer Engineering |
| author_facet | School of Computer Engineering Rekha Kemburaju |
| author_sort | Rekha Kemburaju |
| collection | NTU |
| description | Software architecture provides a powerful way to manage the complexity of large software systems. Software architecture can help people to better understand the total structure of the system. It has emerged as a distinct form of abstraction for software systems with its own set of design issues, vocabulary, and rules.
In order to describe these architectures many methods have been invented. These are called Architecture description languages (ADLs) [1]. ADL is a formal language used to describe the structure and behaviour of software architecture. It provides features for modelling a software system’s conceptual architecture, distinguished from the system’s implementation.
This paper studies different ADL languages: Wright# , Acme, xADL 2.0, Aesop and its associated tools Process Analysis Toolkit (PAT), AcmeStudio, ArchStudio, and AesopSystem using an ADL comparison framework and an architecture-style evaluation framework.
The ADL comparison framework looks into architecture modelling features and tool support offered by these selected ADLs. This comparison framework intends to highlight the general capabilities and qualities of ADLs.
The evaluation framework is complimentary to this general survey of ADLs. It evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of selected ADLs for their support to model the Client-server and Pipe-and-filter architecture styles. |
| first_indexed | 2025-02-19T03:50:52Z |
| format | Final Year Project (FYP) |
| id | ntu-10356/59005 |
| institution | Nanyang Technological University |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2025-02-19T03:50:52Z |
| publishDate | 2014 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | ntu-10356/590052023-03-03T20:36:58Z Survey on software architecture design approaches and tools Rekha Kemburaju School of Computer Engineering Asst Prof Liu Yang DRNTU::Engineering::Computer science and engineering::Software::Software engineering Software architecture provides a powerful way to manage the complexity of large software systems. Software architecture can help people to better understand the total structure of the system. It has emerged as a distinct form of abstraction for software systems with its own set of design issues, vocabulary, and rules. In order to describe these architectures many methods have been invented. These are called Architecture description languages (ADLs) [1]. ADL is a formal language used to describe the structure and behaviour of software architecture. It provides features for modelling a software system’s conceptual architecture, distinguished from the system’s implementation. This paper studies different ADL languages: Wright# , Acme, xADL 2.0, Aesop and its associated tools Process Analysis Toolkit (PAT), AcmeStudio, ArchStudio, and AesopSystem using an ADL comparison framework and an architecture-style evaluation framework. The ADL comparison framework looks into architecture modelling features and tool support offered by these selected ADLs. This comparison framework intends to highlight the general capabilities and qualities of ADLs. The evaluation framework is complimentary to this general survey of ADLs. It evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of selected ADLs for their support to model the Client-server and Pipe-and-filter architecture styles. Bachelor of Engineering (Computer Science) 2014-04-21T02:21:48Z 2014-04-21T02:21:48Z 2014 2014 Final Year Project (FYP) http://hdl.handle.net/10356/59005 en Nanyang Technological University 82 p. application/pdf |
| spellingShingle | DRNTU::Engineering::Computer science and engineering::Software::Software engineering Rekha Kemburaju Survey on software architecture design approaches and tools |
| title | Survey on software architecture design approaches and tools |
| title_full | Survey on software architecture design approaches and tools |
| title_fullStr | Survey on software architecture design approaches and tools |
| title_full_unstemmed | Survey on software architecture design approaches and tools |
| title_short | Survey on software architecture design approaches and tools |
| title_sort | survey on software architecture design approaches and tools |
| topic | DRNTU::Engineering::Computer science and engineering::Software::Software engineering |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/10356/59005 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT rekhakemburaju surveyonsoftwarearchitecturedesignapproachesandtools |