Showing papers on "Legacy mode published in 2006"
••
22 Mar 2006TL;DR: The approach reifies the execution traces and uses logic programming to express tests on them, which eliminates the need to programatically bring the system in a particular state, and handles the test-writer a high-level abstraction mechanism to query the trace.
Abstract: When reengineering legacy systems, it is crucial to assess if the legacy behavior has been preserved or how it changed due to the reengineering effort. Ideally if a legacy system is covered by tests, running the tests on the new version can identify potential differences or discrepancies. However, writing tests for an unknown and large system is difficult due to the lack of internal knowledge. It is especially difficult to bring the system to an appropriate state. Our solution is based on the acknowledgment that one of the few trustable piece of information available when approaching a legacy system is the running system itself. Our approach reifies the execution traces and uses logic programming to express tests on them. Thereby it eliminates the need to programatically bring the system in a particular state, and handles the test-writer a high-level abstraction mechanism to query the trace. The resulting system, called Testlog, was used on several real-world case studies to validate our claims.
50 citations
•
12 Oct 2006TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose a method and an apparatus for preserving compatibility between legacy mode of operation and new mode of operating in a communication system, wherein allocation of resources is different in the legacy mode and the new mode-of-operation is disclosed.
Abstract: A method and an apparatus for preserving compatibility between legacy mode of operation and new mode of operation in a communication system, wherein allocation of resources is different in the legacy mode of operation and the new mode of operation is disclosed. Accordingly, an entity of a wireless access network, e.g., a base station, transmits signals comprising information about reallocation of resources from a legacy mode of operation to a new mode of operation. These signals are received at another entity of a wireless access network, e.g., a subscriber station, which then controls use by the subscriber station of resources allocated to the subscriber station in accordance with the information.
24 citations
••
04 Dec 2006TL;DR: This paper introduces three design patterns for managing legacy systems that function as databases of objective questions: lowest common denominator, most popular and negotiated interfaces and reflects on how they have been used within the domain of e-learning to wrap legacy systems.
Abstract: Web Services are increasingly being used to create a wide range of distributed systems, many of which involve legacy software. Developing service interfaces for these legacy systems can be difficult, as for interoperability reasons it is advantageous to use a common service interface that is independent of the particular legacy system behind it. This enables other services to interoperate with like legacy systems regardless of their implementation. Unfortunately, similar legacy systems can offer subtly different functionality from each other, making agreeing on a common interface difficult. This paper introduces three design patterns for managing this problem: Lowest Common Denominator, Most Popular and Negotiated Interfaces. It formally presents these patterns and reflects on how they have been used within the domain of e-learning to wrap legacy systems that function as databases of objective questions.
11 citations
•
TL;DR: In this article, the authors have built upon the L2CBD (Legacy to Component Based Development) methodology providing reengineering process including concrete procedures, product-works, guidelines and considerations.
Abstract: Most legacy systems are being pressured to continuously respond to changing requirements, but it is impossible almost to cope with these requests effectively. Because many legacy systems have suffered from lack of standardization and openness, difficulty of change, and absence of distributed architecture. Especially, according as legacy system has been deteriorating from an architectural point of view over the years, we must continually maintain these legacy systems at high cost for applying new technologies and extending their business requirements. For the purposes of transforming a legacy system into component system, we need systematic methodologies and concrete guidelines. Through these, we can share information at different levels of abstraction ranging from code to software architecture, and construct the component system with better component-based architecture. To achieve these goals, we have built upon the L2CBD (Legacy to Component Based Development) methodology providing reengineering process including concrete procedures, product-works, guidelines and considerations. We can transform legacy systems into new component system with improved software architecture by adapting L2CBD.
11 citations
••
08 May 2006TL;DR: This work has built upon the L2CBD (Legacy to Component Based Development) methodology providing reengineering process including concrete procedures, product-works, guidelines and considerations, and can transform legacy systems into new component system with improved software architecture by adapting L1CBD.
Abstract: Most legacy systems are being pressured to continuously respond to changing requirements, but it is impossible almost to cope with these requests effectively. Because many legacy systems have suffered from lack of standardization and openness, difficulty of change, and absence of distributed architecture. Especially, according as legacy system has been deteriorating from an architectural point of view over the years, we must continually maintain these legacy systems at high cost for applying new technologies and extending their business requirements. For the purposes of transforming a legacy system into component system, we need systematic methodologies and concrete guidelines. Through these, we can share information at different levels of abstraction ranging from code to software architecture, and construct the component system with better component-based architecture.
To achieve these goals, we have built upon the L2CBD (Legacy to Component Based Development) methodology providing reengineering process including concrete procedures, product-works, guidelines and considerations. We can transform legacy systems into new component system with improved software architecture by adapting L2CBD.
6 citations