首页> 外文期刊>Software and systems modeling >Imperative versus declarative constraint specification languages: a controlled experiment
【24h】

Imperative versus declarative constraint specification languages: a controlled experiment

机译:势在必行与陈述约束规范语言:受控实验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Model-based software engineering gains further attention these days. To better support it, the use of constraint languages is important in order to bridge expressiveness gaps and eliminate ambiguity. Nevertheless, the use of model-based constraint languages, like the Object Constraint Language (OCL), is quite limited and the specification of constraints is left to the implementation stage. One option for these practices might be the misconception that model-based constraint languages are difficult to work with. In this paper, we examine the usages of representative constraint languages, namely OCL, for model-based constraint languages, and Java, for implementation-based constraint languages. In particular, we examine their usage in understanding and developing constraints. We evaluate these usages via a controlled experiment with 110 Information Systems Engineering undergraduate students. We found out that using OCL outperforms using Java for both understanding and developing constraints. Yet, the students had more confidence with Java. The results indicate that the aforementioned misconception is wrong and there is a need for further education regarding model-based constraints languages, so to get more practice and confidence.
机译:基于模型的软件工程这些天会进一步注意。为了更好地支持它,使用约束语言是重要的,以便弥合表现力差距并消除歧义。然而,使用基于模型的约束语言,如对象约束语言(OCL),非常有限,并且约束的规范留给实现阶段。这些实践的一个选择可能是误解,即基于模型的约束语言难以使用。在本文中,我们检查了基于模型的约束语言和Java的代表性约束语言,即,基于模型的约束语言的徽章。特别是,我们在理解和发展限制方面检查他们的使用情况。我们通过具有110个信息系统工程本科学生的受控实验评估这些用途。我们发现,使用java使用ocl优于理解和开发约束。然而,学生对Java有更多的信心。结果表明,上述误解是错误的,并且需要有关基于模型的限制语言的进一步教育,从而获得更多的实践和信心。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号