ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Structured analysis and object-oriented development are not compatible
Full text PdfPdf (692 KB)
Source ACM SIGAda Ada Letters archive
Volume XI ,  Issue 9  (Nov./Dec. 1991) table of contents
Pages: 56 - 66  
Year of Publication: 1991
ISSN:1094-3641
Author
Donald Firesmith  Advanced Software Technology Specialists, 17124 Lutz Road, Ossian, Indiana
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 4,   Downloads (12 Months): 42,   Citation Count: 3
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/122012.122013
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Since its introduction in 1978, traditional Structured Analysis has been an industry standar d method for software requirements analysis that is supported by numerous CASE tools. Since their introduction in the early 1980s, various forms of Object-Oriented Development (OOD) have also become the preferred approach for the design and coding of Ada software. More recently, OOD has included various forms of Object-Oriented Requirements Analysis. OOD has therefor e come into direct competition with Structured Analysis. While some methodologists have advocated retaining Structured Analysis and have worked to merge the two paradigms, others have pointed out significant disadvantages of combining them and urge the use of a unifie d object-oriented paradigm throughout all development activities. A recent article published in Ada Letters by Ken Shumate [SH 1991] is illustrative of this controversy and has prompted this reply.It is the thesis of this paper that traditional Structured Analysis, even when modified for real-tim e systems, is a technically obsolete way to specify software requirements, and that Structure d Analysis and Object-Oriented Development are fundamentally incompatible and unnecessarily difficult for software engineers to combine effectively.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
[BR 1991] Berard, Edward V., "Object-Oriented Requirements Analysis," Berard Software Engineering, Inc., (301) 353-9652, 10 February 1991.
 
7
[BU 1987] Bulman, Dave, "Model-Based Object-Oriented Design for Ada," Pragmatics, Inc., (808) 883-9011, 14 July 1987.
8
 
9
[CM TBD] Comer, Ed, Ada Box Structures Methodology Handbook, Software Productivity Solutions, (407) 984-3370, 31 July 1989.
 
10
[CY 1989] Coad, Peter and Yourdon, Ed, OORA - Object-Oriented Requirements Analysis, Prentice Hall, 1989.
 
11
 
12
[FG 1991] Firesmith, Donald and Gaumer, Dale, The ASTS Development Method 2 (ADM_2) User's Manual, ASTS, Fort Wayne, Indiana, (219) 639-6305, 1991.
 
13
 
14
[ML 1956] Miller, G. A., "The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two," The Psychological Review, Volume 63, Number 2, March 1956.
 
15
16
 
17
 
18
 
19
[YC 1975] Yourdon, Edward and Constantine, Larry L., Structured Design. Yourdon Press, 1975.