Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorGrønmo, Roy
dc.contributor.authorAagedal, Jan Øyvind
dc.contributor.authorSolberg, Arnor
dc.contributor.authorBelaunde, Mariano
dc.contributor.authorRosenthal, Peter
dc.contributor.authorFaugere, Madeleine
dc.contributor.authorRitter, Tom
dc.contributor.authorBorn, Marc
dc.date.accessioned2016-04-29T13:16:15Z
dc.date.accessioned2016-05-02T08:33:01Z
dc.date.available2016-04-29T13:16:15Z
dc.date.available2016-05-02T08:33:01Z
dc.date.issued2005
dc.identifier.citationSINTEF Rapport A312, 17 p. SINTEF , 2005nb_NO
dc.identifier.isbn8214036593
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2388147
dc.description-nb_NO
dc.description.abstractSTF90 A05045This report has identified 29 weighted evaluation criteria representing desired properties of a model to model transformation language. These criteria have been used to evaluate the current QVT Merge specification. We have so far only been able to evaluate 21 of these criteria, mainly due to missing tool support. Some of the criteria are considered absolute in the sense that missing to fulfil such a criterion is considered a failure. The 21 evaluated criteria give a score of 59 out of a maximum possible score of 68 (language-based + example-based testing). We have also compared the QVT-Merge submission with the QVT-Compuware/Sun submission and at the time being the QVT-Merge seems to be the preferred one due to more support on the absolute criteria and better easy-to-use score. Eight transformation examples for solving six different transformation tasks have given a lot of insight on the ease of use criteria for both simple and complex transformations. When defining transformations using QVT Merge we believe that a lot of effort may be required in order to define the source and target  metamodels. The evaluation in this report could be improved by using the reference examples with alternative approaches published in the literature. An available QVT-Merge tool is necessary in order to provide evaluations of all the suggested criteria. In order to further investigate the usability of the graphical notation, we need to define more of the transformation examples graphically. Only one of the examples has been specified graphically in this version. The current evaluation has been done by a single evaluator who has only reviewed the transformation code that was written by somebody else. The evaluation will be further improved by incorporating input from other evaluators as well as evaluation from those who wrote the transformation code. Oppdragsgiver: EU Commissionnb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.titleEvaluation of the QVT Merge Language Proposalnb_NO
dc.typeResearch reportnb_NO
dc.date.updated2016-04-29T13:16:15Z
dc.identifier.cristin1268944
dc.relation.projectStiftelsen SINTEF: 90B209nb_NO


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel