Jordi Cabot

Bio: Jordi Cabot is an academic researcher from Open University of Catalonia. The author has contributed to research in topics: Model-driven architecture & Object Constraint Language. The author has an hindex of 38, co-authored 106 publications receiving 5022 citations. Previous affiliations of Jordi Cabot include Canadian Real Estate Association & Catalan Institution for Research and Advanced Studies.

Model-Driven Software Engineering in Practice

Abstract: This book discusses how model-based approaches can improve the daily practice of software professionals. This is known as Model-Driven Software Engineering (MDSE) or, simply, Model-Driven Engineering (MDE). MDSE practices have proved to increase efficiency and effectiveness in software development, as demonstrated by various quantitative and qualitative studies. MDSE adoption in the software industry is foreseen to grow exponentially in the near future, e.g., due to the convergence of software development and business analysis. The aim of this book is to provide you with an agile and flexible tool to introduce you to the MDSE world, thus allowing you to quickly understand its basic principles and techniques and to choose the right set of MDSE instruments for your needs so that you can start to benefit from MDSE right away. The book is organized into two main parts. The first part discusses the foundations of MDSE in terms of basic concepts (i.e., models and transformations), driving principles, application scenarios and current standards, like the well-known MDA initiative proposed by OMG (Object Management Group) as well as the practices on how to integrate MDSE in existing development processes. The second part deals with the technical aspects of MDSE, spanning from the basics on when and how to build a domain-specific modeling language, to the description of Model-to-Text and Model-to-Model transformations, and the tools that support the management of MDSE projects. The book is targeted to a diverse set of readers, spanning: professionals, CTOs, CIOs, and team managers that need to have a bird's eye vision on the matter, so as to take the appropriate decisions when it comes to choosing the best development techniques for their company or team; software analysts, developers, or designers that expect to use MDSE for improving everyday work productivity, either by applying the basic modeling techniques and notations or by defining new domain-specific modeling languages and applying end-to-end MDSE practices in the software factory; and academic teachers and students to address undergrad and postgrad courses on MDSE. In addition to the contents of the book, more resources are provided on the book's website http://www.mdse-book.com/, including the examples presented in the book. Table of Contents: Introduction / MDSE Principles / MDSE Use Cases / Model-Driven Architecture (MDA) / Integration of MDSE in your Development Process / Modeling Languages at a Glance / Developing your Own Modeling Language / Model-to-Model Transformations / Model-to-Text Transformations / Managing Models / Summary

Object constraint language (OCL): a definitive guide

Abstract: The Object Constraint Language (OCL) started as a complement of the UML notation with the goal to overcome the limitations of UML (and in general, any graphical notation) in terms of precisely specifying detailed aspects of a system design. Since then, OCL has become a key component of any model-driven engineering (MDE) technique as the default language for expressing all kinds of (meta)model query, manipulation and specification requirements. Among many other applications, OCL is frequently used to express model transformations (as part of the source and target patterns of transformation rules), well-formedness rules (as part of the definition of new domain-specific languages), or code-generation templates (as a way to express the generation patterns and rules). This chapter pretends to provide a comprehensive view of this language, its many applications and available tool support as well as the latest research developments and open challenges around it.

Verification of UML/OCL Class Diagrams using Constraint Programming

Abstract: In the MDD and MDA approaches, models become the primary artifacts of the development process. Therefore, assessment of the correctness of such models is a key issue to ensure the quality of the final application. In that sense, this paper presents an automatic method that uses the Constraint Programming paradigm to verify UML class diagrams extended with OCL constraints. In our approach, both class diagrams and OCL constraints are translated into a Constraint Satisfaction Problem. Then, compliance of the diagram with respect to several correctness proper- ties such as weak and strong satisfiability or absence of constraint redundancies can be formally verified.

MoDisco: a Model Driven Reverse Engineering Framework

Abstract: Context: Most companies, independently of their size and activity type, are facing the problem of managing, maintaining and/or replacing (part of) their existing software systems. These legacy systems are often large applications playing a critical role in the company’s information system and with a non-negligible impact on its daily operations. Improving their comprehension (e.g., architecture, features, enforced rules, handled data) is a key point when dealing with their evolution/modernization. Objective: The process of obtaining useful higher-level representations of (legacy) systems is called reverse engineering (RE), and remains a complex goal to achieve. Socalled Model Driven Reverse Engineering (MDRE) has been proposed to enhance more traditional RE processes. However, generic and extensible MDRE solutions potentially addressing several kinds of scenarios relying on different legacy technologies are still missing or incomplete. This paper proposes to make a step in this direction. Method: MDRE is the application of Model Driven Engineering (MDE) principles and techniques to RE in order to generate relevant model-based views on legacy systems, thus facilitating their understanding and manipulation. In this context, MDRE is practically used in order to 1) discover initial models from the legacy artifacts composing a given system and 2) understand (process) these models to generate relevant views (i.e., derived models) on this system. Results: Capitalizing on the different MDRE practices and our previous experience (e.g., in real modernization projects), this paper introduces and details the MoDisco open source MDRE framework. It also presents the underlying MDRE global methodology and architecture accompanying this proposed tooling. Conclusion: MoDisco is intended to make easier the design and building of modelbased solutions dedicated to legacy systems RE. As an empirical evidence of its relevance and usability, we report on its successful application in real industrial projects and on the concrete experience we gained from that.

UMLtoCSP: a tool for the formal verification of UML/OCL models using constraint programming

Abstract: We present UMLtoCSP, a tool for the formal verification of UML/OCL models. Given a UML class diagram annotated with OCL constraints, UMLtoCSP is able to automatically check several correctness properties, such as the strong and weak satisfiability of the model or the lack of redundant constraints. The tool uses Constraint Logic Programming as the underlying formalism and the constraint solver ECLiPSe as the verification engine.

Test Driven Development: By Example

Abstract: From the Book: “Clean code that works” is Ron Jeffries’ pithy phrase. The goal is clean code that works, and for a whole bunch of reasons: Clean code that works is a predictable way to develop. You know when you are finished, without having to worry about a long bug trail.Clean code that works gives you a chance to learn all the lessons that the code has to teach you. If you only ever slap together the first thing you think of, you never have time to think of a second, better, thing. Clean code that works improves the lives of users of our software.Clean code that works lets your teammates count on you, and you on them.Writing clean code that works feels good.But how do you get to clean code that works? Many forces drive you away from clean code, and even code that works. Without taking too much counsel of our fears, here’s what we do—drive development with automated tests, a style of development called “Test-Driven Development” (TDD for short). In Test-Driven Development, you: Write new code only if you first have a failing automated test.Eliminate duplication. Two simple rules, but they generate complex individual and group behavior. Some of the technical implications are:You must design organically, with running code providing feedback between decisionsYou must write your own tests, since you can’t wait twenty times a day for someone else to write a testYour development environment must provide rapid response to small changesYour designs must consist of many highly cohesive, loosely coupled components, just to make testing easy The two rules imply an order to the tasks ofprogramming: 1. Red—write a little test that doesn’t work, perhaps doesn’t even compile at first 2. Green—make the test work quickly, committing whatever sins necessary in the process 3. Refactor—eliminate all the duplication created in just getting the test to work Red/green/refactor. The TDD’s mantra. Assuming for the moment that such a style is possible, it might be possible to dramatically reduce the defect density of code and make the subject of work crystal clear to all involved. If so, writing only code demanded by failing tests also has social implications: If the defect density can be reduced enough, QA can shift from reactive to pro-active workIf the number of nasty surprises can be reduced enough, project managers can estimate accurately enough to involve real customers in daily developmentIf the topics of technical conversations can be made clear enough, programmers can work in minute-by-minute collaboration instead of daily or weekly collaborationAgain, if the defect density can be reduced enough, we can have shippable software with new functionality every day, leading to new business relationships with customers So, the concept is simple, but what’s my motivation? Why would a programmer take on the additional work of writing automated tests? Why would a programmer work in tiny little steps when their mind is capable of great soaring swoops of design? Courage. Courage Test-driven development is a way of managing fear during programming. I don’t mean fear in a bad way, pow widdle prwogwammew needs a pacifiew, but fear in the legitimate, this-is-a-hard-problem-and-I-can’t-see-the-end-from-the-beginning sense. If pain is nature’s way of saying “Stop!”, fear is nature’s way of saying “Be careful.” Being careful is good, but fear has a host of other effects: Makes you tentativeMakes you want to communicate lessMakes you shy from feedbackMakes you grumpy None of these effects are helpful when programming, especially when programming something hard. So, how can you face a difficult situation and: Instead of being tentative, begin learning concretely as quickly as possible.Instead of clamming up, communicate more clearly.Instead of avoiding feedback, search out helpful, concrete feedback.(You’ll have to work on grumpiness on your own.) Imagine programming as turning a crank to pull a bucket of water from a well. When the bucket is small, a free-spinning crank is fine. When the bucket is big and full of water, you’re going to get tired before the bucket is all the way up. You need a ratchet mechanism to enable you to rest between bouts of cranking. The heavier the bucket, the closer the teeth need to be on the ratchet. The tests in test-driven development are the teeth of the ratchet. Once you get one test working, you know it is working, now and forever. You are one step closer to having everything working than you were when the test was broken. Now get the next one working, and the next, and the next. By analogy, the tougher the programming problem, the less ground should be covered by each test. Readers of Extreme Programming Explained will notice a difference in tone between XP and TDD. TDD isn’t an absolute like Extreme Programming. XP says, “Here are things you must be able to do to be prepared to evolve further.” TDD is a little fuzzier. TDD is an awareness of the gap between decision and feedback during programming, and techniques to control that gap. “What if I do a paper design for a week, then test-drive the code? Is that TDD?” Sure, it’s TDD. You were aware of the gap between decision and feedback and you controlled the gap deliberately. That said, most people who learn TDD find their programming practice changed for good. “Test Infected” is the phrase Erich Gamma coined to describe this shift. You might find yourself writing more tests earlier, and working in smaller steps than you ever dreamed would be sensible. On the other hand, some programmers learn TDD and go back to their earlier practices, reserving TDD for special occasions when ordinary programming isn’t making progress. There are certainly programming tasks that can’t be driven solely by tests (or at least, not yet). Security software and concurrency, for example, are two topics where TDD is not sufficient to mechanically demonstrate that the goals of the software have been met. Security relies on essentially defect-free code, true, but also on human judgement about the methods used to secure the software. Subtle concurrency problems can’t be reliably duplicated by running the code. Once you are finished reading this book, you should be ready to: Start simplyWrite automated testsRefactor to add design decisions one at a time This book is organized into three sections. An example of writing typical model code using TDD. The example is one I got from Ward Cunningham years ago, and have used many times since, multi-currency arithmetic. In it you will learn to write tests before code and grow a design organically.An example of testing more complicated logic, including reflection and exceptions, by developing a framework for automated testing. This example also serves to introduce you to the xUnit architecture that is at the heart of many programmer-oriented testing tools. In the second example you will learn to work in even smaller steps than in the first example, including the kind of self-referential hooha beloved of computer scientists.Patterns for TDD. Included are patterns for the deciding what tests to write, how to write tests using xUnit, and a greatest hits selection of the design patterns and refactorings used in the examples. I wrote the examples imagining a pair programming session. If you like looking at the map before wandering around, you may want to go straight to the patterns in Section 3 and use the examples as illustrations. If you prefer just wandering around and then looking at the map to see where you’ve been, try reading the examples through and refering to the patterns when you want more detail about a technique, then using the patterns as a reference. Several reviewers have commented they got the most out of the examples when they started up a programming environment and entered the code and ran the tests as they read. A note about the examples. Both examples, multi-currency calculation and a testing framework, appear simple. There are (and I have seen) complicated, ugly, messy ways of solving the same problems. I could have chosen one of those complicated, ugly, messy solutions to give the book an air of “reality.” However, my goal, and I hope your goal, is to write clean code that works. Before teeing off on the examples as being too simple, spend 15 seconds imagining a programming world in which all code was this clear and direct, where there were no complicated solutions, only apparently complicated problems begging for careful thought. TDD is a practice that can help you lead yourself to exactly that careful thought.

Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. Proc. TACAS 2009

Abstract: ing WS1S Systems to Verify Parameterized Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 Kai Baukus, Saddek Bensalem, Yassine Lakhnech and Karsten Stahl FMona: A Tool for Expressing Validation Techniques over Infinite State Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 J.-P. Bodeveix and M. Filali Transitive Closures of Regular Relations for Verifying Infinite-State Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 Bengt Jonsson and Marcus Nilsson Diagnostic and Test Generation Using Static Analysis to Improve Automatic Test Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235 Marius Bozga, Jean-Claude Fernandez and Lucian Ghirvu Efficient Diagnostic Generation for Boolean Equation Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 Radu Mateescu Efficient Model-Checking Compositional State Space Generation with Partial Order Reductions for Asynchronous Communicating Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 Jean-Pierre Krimm and Laurent Mounier Checking for CFFD-Preorder with Tester Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283 Juhana Helovuo and Antti Valmari Fair Bisimulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 Thomas A. Henzinger and Sriram K. Rajamani Integrating Low Level Symmetries into Reachability Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315 Karsten Schmidt Model-Checking Tools Model Checking Support for the ASM High-Level Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331 Giuseppe Del Castillo and Kirsten Winter Table of

Model Driven Engineering

Abstract: The Object Management Group's (OMG) Model Driven Architecture (MDA) strategy envisages a world where models play a more direct role in software production, being amenable to manipulation and transformation by machine. Model Driven Engineering (MDE) is wider in scope than MDA. MDE combines process and analysis with architecture. This article sets out a framework for model driven engineering, which can be used as a point of reference for activity in this area. It proposes an organisation of the modelling 'space' and how to locate models in that space. It discusses different kinds of mappings between models. It explains why process and architecture are tightly connected. It discusses the importance and nature of tools. It identifies the need for defining families of languages and transformations, and for developing techniques for generating/configuring tools from such definitions. It concludes with a call to align metamodelling with formal language engineering techniques.

Internet, phone, mail and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method: reseña

Abstract: Resena de la obra de Don A. Dillman, Jolene D. Smyth y Leah Melani Christian: Internet, Phone, Mail and Mixed-Mode Surveys. The Tailored Design Method. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons

Model-Driven Software Engineering in Practice

Abstract: This book discusses how model-based approaches can improve the daily practice of software professionals. This is known as Model-Driven Software Engineering (MDSE) or, simply, Model-Driven Engineering (MDE). MDSE practices have proved to increase efficiency and effectiveness in software development, as demonstrated by various quantitative and qualitative studies. MDSE adoption in the software industry is foreseen to grow exponentially in the near future, e.g., due to the convergence of software development and business analysis. The aim of this book is to provide you with an agile and flexible tool to introduce you to the MDSE world, thus allowing you to quickly understand its basic principles and techniques and to choose the right set of MDSE instruments for your needs so that you can start to benefit from MDSE right away. The book is organized into two main parts. The first part discusses the foundations of MDSE in terms of basic concepts (i.e., models and transformations), driving principles, application scenarios and current standards, like the well-known MDA initiative proposed by OMG (Object Management Group) as well as the practices on how to integrate MDSE in existing development processes. The second part deals with the technical aspects of MDSE, spanning from the basics on when and how to build a domain-specific modeling language, to the description of Model-to-Text and Model-to-Model transformations, and the tools that support the management of MDSE projects. The book is targeted to a diverse set of readers, spanning: professionals, CTOs, CIOs, and team managers that need to have a bird's eye vision on the matter, so as to take the appropriate decisions when it comes to choosing the best development techniques for their company or team; software analysts, developers, or designers that expect to use MDSE for improving everyday work productivity, either by applying the basic modeling techniques and notations or by defining new domain-specific modeling languages and applying end-to-end MDSE practices in the software factory; and academic teachers and students to address undergrad and postgrad courses on MDSE. In addition to the contents of the book, more resources are provided on the book's website http://www.mdse-book.com/, including the examples presented in the book. Table of Contents: Introduction / MDSE Principles / MDSE Use Cases / Model-Driven Architecture (MDA) / Integration of MDSE in your Development Process / Modeling Languages at a Glance / Developing your Own Modeling Language / Model-to-Model Transformations / Model-to-Text Transformations / Managing Models / Summary