Specifying framework constraints with FCL

ABSTRACT

Object-oriented application frameworks are often misused because application developers do not know how the original framework designers intend their frameworks to be used. The goal of Framework Constraint Language (FCL) is to help detect errors in framework usage. FCL captures the intended usage of frameworks through framework constraints that describe the syntactic structures that frameworks impose on the code of framework-based applications. Framework constraints can be regarded as framework-specific typing rules conveyed by the FCL specifications and enforced by techniques analogous to those of conventional type checking. In essence, FCL is a first-order logic of the syntactic structure of programs. The feasibility and expressiveness of FCL have been evaluated by applying it to parts of frameworks, such as MFC (Microsoft Foundation Classes), and design rules such as Law of Demeter. The current version of the FCL language and associated checker is targeted at C++ frameworks.

REFERENCES

• 1: Boris Bokowski, CoffeeStrainer: statically-checked constraints on the definition and use of types in Java, Proceedings of the 7th European software engineering conference held jointly with the 7th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering, p.355-374, September 06-10, 1999, Toulouse, France
• 2: {2} Roger Crew. ASTLOG: A Language for Examining Abstract Syntax Tree. In Proceedings of the USENIX Conference on Domain-Specific Languages, pages 229-242, October 1997.
• 3: L. P. Deutsch, Design reuse and frameworks in the smalltalk-80 system, Software reusability: vol. 2, applications and experience, ACM Press, New York, NY, 1989 [doi>10.1145/75722.75725]
• 4: Premkumar T. Devanbu, GENOA—a customizable, front-end-retargetable source code analysis framework, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), v.8 n.2, p.177-212, April 1999 [doi>10.1145/304399.304402]
• 5: Erich Gamma , Richard Helm , Ralph Johnson , John Vlissides, Design patterns: elements of reusable object-oriented software, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1995
• 6: {6} Seth Hallem, Benjamin Chelf, Yichen Xie, and Dawson R. Engler. A System and Language for Building System-Specific, Static Analyses. In Proceedings of Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI) 2002, Berlin, Germany, June 17-19 2002.
• 7: {7} Shui Ming Ho. Toward a Framework Constraint Language. In Joint CoLogNet Workshop on Component-based Software Development and Implementation Technology for Computational Logic Systems (ITCLS), Technical University of Madrid, Spain, 19-20, September 2002. Availabe at http://clip.dia.fi.upm.es/Conferences/ Colognet/ITCLS-2002/.
• 8: {8} Daqing Hou. FCL: Automatically Detecting Structural Errors in Framework-based Development. PhD thesis, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, December 2003. Available as technical report TR04-01 at http://www.cs.ualberta.ca.
• 9: Daqing Hou , H. James Hoover , Piotr Rudnicki, Specifying the Law of Demeter and C++ Programming Guidelines with FCL, Proceedings of the Source Code Analysis and Manipulation, Fourth IEEE International Workshop on (SCAM'04), p.119-127, September 15-16, 2004 [doi>10.1109/SCAM.2004.21]
• 10: {10} Daqing Hou, H. James Hoover, and Changyu Yin. The Framework Use Problem: A Preliminary Study with GUI Frameworks. In Proceedings of the First Midwest Software Engineering Conference , DePaul University, Chicago, IL, USA, May 2003.
• 11: Ralph E. Johnson, Components, frameworks, patterns, Proceedings of the 1997 symposium on Software reusability, p.10-17, May 17-20, 1997, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
• 12: Yueh Lin , Scott Meyers, CCEL: The C++ Constraint Expression Language: An Annotated Reference Manual, Version 0.5, Brown University, Providence, RI, 1993
• 13: {13} Alberto Mendelzon and Johannes Sametinger. Reverse Engineering by Visualizing and Querying. Software-Concepts and Tools, 16:170-182, 1995.
• 14: {14} Joseph Newcomer. FlounderCraft Ltd. Available at http://www.flounder.com.
• 15: {15} Object Management Group. Unified Modeling Language 2.0. Available at http://www.uml.org.
• 16: Santanu Paul , Ataul Prakash, A Query Algebra for Program Databases, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.22 n.3, p.202-217, March 1996 [doi>10.1109/32.489080]
• 17: {17} Lutz Prechelt and Christian Kramer. Functionality versus Practicality: Employing Existing Tools for Recovering Structural Design Patterns. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 4(12): 866-882, December 1998. Available at http://www.ipd.uka.de/~prechelt.
• 18: George Shepherd , Scot Wingo, MFC internals: inside the Microsoft foundation class architecture, Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Redwood City, CA, 1996
• 19: {19} Shui Ming Ho. Private communication. August 2004.
• 20: {20} The Mizar Organization. The Mizar Project. Available at http://www.mizar.org.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.2 Design Tools and Techniques
          Subjects: Object-oriented design methods

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.3 PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES
      D.3.2 Language Classifications
          Subjects: Constraint and logic languages
      D.3.3 Language Constructs and Features
          Subjects: Data types and structures

General Terms:
Algorithms, Languages