The reuse of uses in Smalltalk programming

ABSTRACT

Software reuse, a long-standing and refractory issue in software technology, has been specifically emphasized as an advantage of the object-oriented programming paradigm. We report an empirical study of expert Smalltalk programmers reusing user interface classes in small graphical applications. Our primary goal was to develop a qualitative characterization of expert reuse strategies that could be used to identify requirements for teaching and supporting reuse programming. A secondary interest was to demonstrate to these experts the Reuse View Matcher—a prototype reuse tool—and to collect some initial observations of this tool in use during reuse programming. We observed extensive “reuse of uses” in the programmers' work: they relied heavily on code in expample applications that provided an implicit specification for reuse of the target class. We called this implicit specification a “usage context.” The programmers searched for relevant usage contexts early. They repeatedly evaluated the contextualized information to develop solution plans, and they borrowed and adapted it when the sample context suited their immediate reuse goals. The process of code development was highly dynamic and incremental; analysis and implementation were tightly interleaved, frequently driven by testing and debugging. These results are considered in terms of the tradeoffs that inhere in the reuse of uses and the teaching and tool support that might improve the efficiency and accuracy of this approach to reuse.

REFERENCES

• 1: AUSUBEL, D. P. 1960. The use of advance organizers in the learning and retention of meaningful verbal material. J. Educ. Psychol. 51, 267-272.
• 2: Rachel K. E. Bellamy , John M. Carroll, Redesign by design, Proceedings of the IFIP TC13 Third Interational Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, p.199-205, August 27-31, 1990
• 3: Ted J. Biggerstaff , Alan J. Perlis, Software reusability: vol. 1, concepts and models, ACM Press, New York, NY, 1989
• 4: BIGGERSTAFF,T.J.AND RICHTER, C. 1987. Reusability framework, assessment, and direc-tions. IEEE Softw. 4, 2 (Mar.), 41-49.
• 5: John M. Carroll , Mary Beth Rosson, Paradox of the active user, Interfacing thought: cognitive aspects of human-computer interaction, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987
• 6: CARROLL,J.M.AND ROSSON, M. B. 1991. Deliberated evolution: Stalking the View Matcher in design space. Hum. Comput. Interact. 6, 3-4, 281-318.
• 7: John M. Carroll , Wendy A. Kellogg , Mary Beth Rosson, The task-artifact cycle, Designing interaction: psychology at the human-computer interface, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 1991
• 8: John M. Carroll , Janice A. Singer , Rachel K. E. Bellamy , Sherman R. Alpert, A view matcher for learning Smalltalk, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Empowering people, p.431-437, April 01-05, 1990, Seattle, Washington, United States [doi>10.1145/97243.97320]
• 9: CARROLL,J.M.,THOMAS,J.C.,AND MALHOTRA, A. 1979. A clinical-experimental analysis of design problem solving. Des. Stud. 1, 2, 84-92.
• 10: Brad J Cox, Object oriented programming: an evolutionary approach, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1986
• 11: COX, B. J. 1987. Building malleable systems from software "chips." Computerworld (Mar.), 59-86.
• 12: DE~ TIENNE, F. 1991. Reasoning from a schema and from an analog in software code reuse. In Proceedings of Workshop on Empirical Studies of Programmers (ESP IV). Ablex, Norwood, N.J., 5-22.
• 13: 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]
• 14: DIGITALK, I. 1989. Smalltalk/V PM: Object-Oriented Programming System. Digitalk Inc., Los Angeles, Calif.
• 15: ERICSSON,K.A.AND SIMON, H. A. 1980. Verbal reports as data. Psychol. Rev. 87, 215-251.
• 16: FISCHER, G. 1987. Cognitive view of reuse and redesign. IEEE Softw. 4, 3, 60-72.
• 17: FLANAGAN, J. C. 1954. The critical incident technique. Psychol. Bull. 51, 28, 28-35.
• 18: GUINDON, R. 1990. Designing the design process: Exploiting opportunistic thoughts. Hum. Comput. Interact. 5, 1, 305-344.
• 19: Richard Helm , Yoëlle S. Maarek, Integrating information retrieval and domain specific approaches for browsing and retrieval in object-oriented class libraries, Conference proceedings on Object-oriented programming systems, languages, and applications, p.47-61, October 06-11, 1991, Phoenix, Arizona, United States
• 20: JOHNSON,R.E.AND FOOTE, B. 1988. Designing reusable classes. J. Object-Oriented Pro-gram. 1, 2 (June/July), 22-35.
• 21: B. M. Lange , T. G. Moher, Some strategies of reuse in an object-oriented programming environment, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Wings for the mind, p.69-73, March 1989
• 22: John A. Lewis , Sallie M. Henry , Dennis G. Kafura , Robert S. Schulman, An empirical study of the object-oriented paradigm and software reuse, Conference proceedings on Object-oriented programming systems, languages, and applications, p.184-196, October 06-11, 1991, Phoenix, Arizona, United States
• 23: Mark A. Linton , John M. Vissides , Paul R. Calder, Composing User Interfaces with InterViews, Computer, v.22 n.2, p.8-22, February 1989 [doi>10.1109/2.19829]
• 24: MEYER, B. 1987. Reusability: The case for object-oriented design. IEEE Softw. 4, 2 (Mar.), 50-64.
• 25: Bertrand Meyer, Object-oriented software construction (2nd ed.), Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1997
• 26: Rubén Prieto-Díaz, Implementing faceted classification for software reuse, Communications of the ACM, v.34 n.5, p.88-97, May 1991 [doi>10.1145/103167.103176]
• 27: RAJ,R.K.AND LEVY, H. M. 1989. A compositional model of software reuse. In Proceedings of European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP '89). British Computer Society, London, U.K., 3-24.
• 28: David F. Redmiles, Reducing the variability of programmers' performance through explained examples, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.67-73, April 24-29, 1993, Amsterdam, The Netherlands [doi>10.1145/169059.169082]
• 29: Mary Beth Rosson , John M. Carroll, Active Programming Strategies in Reuse, Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, p.4-20, July 26-30, 1993
• 30: Mary Beth Rosson , John M. Carrol , Rachel K. E. Bellamy, Smalltalk scaffolding: a case study of minimalist instruction, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Empowering people, p.423-430, April 01-05, 1990, Seattle, Washington, United States [doi>10.1145/97243.97319]
• 31: Mary Beth Rosson , John M. Carroll , Christine Sweeney, A view matcher for reusing Smalltalk classes, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Reaching through technology, p.277-283, April 27-May 02, 1991, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States [doi>10.1145/108844.108916]
• 32: Mark K. Singley , John M. Carroll, Minimalist planning tools in an instructional system for smalltalk programming, Proceedings of the IFIP TC13 Third Interational Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, p.937-944, August 27-31, 1990
• 33: TAENZER, D., GANTI, M., AND PODAR, S. 1989. Problems in object-oriented software reuse. In Proceedings of European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP '89). British Computer Society, Cambridge, U.K., 25-38.
• 34: Willemien Visser, More or less following a plan during design: opportunistic deviations in specification, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, v.33 n.3, p.247-278, Sept. 1990 [doi>10.1016/S0020-7373(05)80119-1]

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.1 PROGRAMMING TECHNIQUES

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.m Miscellaneous
          Subjects: Reusable software**

  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)
          Subjects: Training, help, and documentation

General Terms:
Documentation, Human Factors, Languages

Keywords:
Smalltalk, debugging into existence, example-based learning, reuse of uses, usage context