ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Signature matching: a tool for using software libraries
Full text PdfPdf (1.75 MB)
Source ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM) archive
Volume 4 ,  Issue 2  (April 1995) table of contents
Pages: 146 - 170  
Year of Publication: 1995
ISSN:1049-331X
Authors
Amy Moormann Zaremski  School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA
Jeannette M. Wing  School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 7,   Downloads (12 Months): 56,   Citation Count: 45
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/210134.210179
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Signature matching is a method for organizing, navigating through, and retrieving from software libraries. We consider two kinds of software library components—functions and modules—and hence two kinds of matching—function matching and module matching. The signature of a function is simply its type; the signature of a module is a multiset of user-defined types and a multiset of function signatures. For both functions and modules, we consider not just exact match but also various flavors of relaxed match. We describe various applications of signature matching as a tool for using software libraries, inspired by the use of our implementation of a function signature matcher written in Standard ML.


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
~ATT. 1993 The Standard ML of New Jersey hbrary reference manual. Tech. Rep., AT & T Bell ~Laboratories, Murray Hill, N.J.
 
4
~BERRY, D. 1991. The Edinburgh SML Library Tech Rep ECS-LFCS-91-148, Univ of Edin- ~burgh, U.K. April.
5
 
6
~BISCHOFBERGER, W.a. 1992 Sniff--a pragmatic approach to a C ++ programming environ- ~ment. In USENIX C++ Conference. USENIX Assoc., Berkeley, Cahf., 67 81.
7
8
 
9
~FIELD, A. J. AND HARRISON, P. G. 1988. Functl. onal Programming. Addison-Wesley, Reading, ~Mass.
 
10
~FISCHER, B, KIEVERNAGEL, M., AND STRUCKMANN, W. 1994. VCR: A VDM-based software ~component retrieval tool. Tech. Rep. 94-08, Technical Univ. of Braunschweig, Germany Nov.
 
11
~FONTANA, M. AND NEATH, M. 1991. Checked out and long overdue: Experiences in the design of ~a C 4% class library. In USENIX C44- Conference. USENIX Assoc., Berkeley, Calif., 179-191.
 
12
GARLanD, S. J. AND GUTTAG, J.V. 1991. A guide to LP, the Larch Prover. Rep. 82, DEC ~Sys~ems Research Center, Palo Alto, Calif. Dec.
 
13
14
 
15
~JENG, J. J. AND CHENG, B. H.C. 1992. Formal methods applied to reuse. In Proceedings of the ~5th Workshop on Software Reuse.
 
16
 
17
 
18
 
19
~MILNEa, R. 1978. A theory of type polymorphism in programming J. Comput. Syst. Scf. 17, 3 ~(Dec.), 348-375.
 
20
21
 
22
23
24
 
25
~RAMAMOORTHY, C. V., Ed. 1984. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. SE-IO, 5 (Sept.).
26
 
27
~RITTRI, M. 1992. Retrieving library identifiers via equational matching of types. Tech. Rep. 65, ~Programming Methodology Group, Dept. of Computer Sciences, Chalmers Univ. of Technology ~and Univ. of Gi)teborg. (Reprinted with corrections May 1992).
 
28
~ROLLINS, E. J. AND WING, J.M. 1991. Specifications as search keys for software libraries. In ~Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Logic Programming. MIT Press, Cambridge, ~Mass.
29
 
30
~STRINGER-CALVERT, D. W.J. 1994. Signature matching for Ada software reuse. Master's thesis, ~Univ. of York, York, England.
 
31
 
32
 
33
 
34
TESLEa, L. 1981. The Smalltalk environment. BYTE 6, 8 (Aug.), 90-147.
 
35
~TARDtTI, D. AND ROLLINS, G. 1993. Local guide to Standard ML. Tech. Rep., CMU, Pittsburgh, ~Pa. March.
 
36
37
38

CITED BY  45

Collaborative Colleagues:
Amy Moormann Zaremski: colleagues
Jeannette M. Wing: colleagues