Abstract
Metamodel evolution requires model migration. To correctly migrate models, evolution needs to be made explicit. Manually describing evolution is error-prone and redundant. Metamodel matching offers a solution by automatically detecting evolution, but is only capable of detecting primitive evolution steps. In practice, primitive evolution steps are jointly applied to form a complex evolution step, which has the same effect on a metamodel as the sum of its parts, yet generally has a different effect in migration. Detection of complex evolution is therefore needed. In this paper, we present an approach to reconstruct complex evolution between two metamodel versions, using a matching result as input. It supports operator dependencies and mixed, overlapping, and incorrectly ordered complex operator components. It also supports interference between operators, where the effect of one operator is partially or completely hidden from the target metamodel by other operators.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Brun, C., Pierantonio, A.: Model differences in the eclipse modelling framework. UPGRADE, The European Journal for the Informatics Professional (2008)
Casais, E.: Managing class evolution in object-oriented systems, ch. 8, pp. 201–244. Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd. (1995)
Cicchetti, A., Di Ruscio, D., Eramo, R., Pierantonio, A.: Automating co-evolution in model-driven engineering. In: Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, EDOC. IEEE (2008)
Cicchetti, A., Di Ruscio, D., Pierantonio, A.: Managing Dependent Changes in Coupled Evolution. In: Paige, R.F. (ed.) ICMT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5563, pp. 35–51. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Del Fabro, M.D., Valduriez, P.: Semi-automatic model integration using matching transformations and weaving models. In: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, SAC 2007, pp. 963–970. ACM (2007)
Demeyer, S., Ducasse, S., Nierstrasz, O.: Finding refactorings via change metrics. In: Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, OOPSLA 2000, pp. 166–177. ACM (2000)
Falleri, J.-R., Huchard, M., Lafourcade, M., Nebut, C.: Metamodel Matching for Automatic Model Transformation Generation. In: Czarnecki, K., Ober, I., Bruel, J.-M., Uhl, A., Völter, M. (eds.) MODELS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5301, pp. 326–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Favre, J.-M.: Languages evolve too! changing the software time scale. In: IWPSE 2005: Eighth International Workshop on Principles of Software Evolution, pp. 33–42. IEEE (2005)
Garcés, K., Jouault, F., Cointe, P., Bézivin, J.: Managing Model Adaptation by Precise Detection of Metamodel Changes. In: Paige, R.F., Hartman, A., Rensink, A. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5562, pp. 34–49. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Godfrey, M.W., Zou, L.: Using origin analysis to detect merging and splitting of source code entities. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 166–181 (2005)
Herrmannsdoerfer, M., Benz, S., Juergens, E.: COPE - Automating Coupled Evolution of Metamodels and Models. In: Drossopoulou, S. (ed.) ECOOP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5653, pp. 52–76. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Herrmannsdoerfer, M., Ratiu, D., Wachsmuth, G.: Language Evolution in Practice: The History of GMF. In: van den Brand, M., Gašević, D., Gray, J. (eds.) SLE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5969, pp. 3–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Herrmannsdoerfer, M., Vermolen, S.D., Wachsmuth, G.: An Extensive Catalog of Operators for the Coupled Evolution of Metamodels and Models. In: Malloy, B., Staab, S., van den Brand, M. (eds.) SLE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6563, pp. 163–182. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Kniesel, G., Koch, H.: Static composition of refactorings. SCP 52(1-3), 9–51 (2004)
Kolovos, D., Di Ruscio, D., Pierantonio, A., Paige, R.: Different models for model matching: An analysis of approaches to support model differencing. In: ICSE Workshop on Comparison and Versioning of Software Models, CVSM 2009, pp. 1–6 (May 2009)
Lin, Y., Gray, J., Jouault, F.: DSMDiff: a differentiation tool for domain-specific models. European Journal of Information Systems 16(4), 349–361 (2007)
Lopes, D., Hammoudi, S., Abdelouahab, Z.: Schema matching in the context of model driven engineering: From theory to practice. In: Advances in Systems, Computing Sciences and Software Engineering, pp. 219–227. Springer (2006)
Object Management Group. Meta Object Facility (MOF) core specification version 2.0 (2006), http://www.omg.org/spec/MOF/2.0/
Ohst, D., Welle, M., Kelter, U.: Differences between versions of uml diagrams. In: Proc. of the 9th European Software Engineering Conference, ESEC/FSE, pp. 227–236. ACM (2003)
Rahm, E., Bernstein, P.A.: A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching. The VLDB Journal 10(4), 334–350 (2001)
Shvaiko, P., Euzenat, J.: A Survey of Schema-Based Matching Approaches. In: Spaccapietra, S. (ed.) Journal on Data Semantics IV. LNCS, vol. 3730, pp. 146–171. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Sprinkle, J.M.: Metamodel driven model migration. PhD thesis, Vanderbilt University (2003)
Steinberg, D., Budinsky, F., Paternostro, M., Merks, E.: EMF: Eclipse Modeling Framework 2.0. Addison-Wesley (2009)
Sun, X.L., Rose, E.: Automated schema matching techniques: An exploratory study. Research Letters in the Information and Mathematical Science 4, 113–136 (2003)
Tu, Q., Godfrey, M.: An integrated approach for studying architectural evolution. In: 10th International Workshop on Program Comprehension, pp. 127–136 (2002)
Vermolen, S.D., Visser, E.: Heterogeneous Coupled Evolution of Software Languages. In: Czarnecki, K., Ober, I., Bruel, J.-M., Uhl, A., Völter, M. (eds.) MODELS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5301, pp. 630–644. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Visser, E.: Program Transformation with Stratego/XT: Rules, Strategies, Tools, and Systems in StrategoXT-0.9. In: Lengauer, C., Batory, D., Blum, A., Vetta, A. (eds.) Domain-Specific Program Generation. LNCS, vol. 3016, pp. 216–238. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Visser, E.: WebDSL: A Case Study in Domain-Specific Language Engineering. In: Lämmel, R., Visser, J., Saraiva, J. (eds.) GTTSE 2007. LNCS, vol. 5235, pp. 291–373. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Wachsmuth, G.: Metamodel Adaptation and Model Co-adaptation. In: Bateni, M. (ed.) ECOOP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4609, pp. 600–624. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Xing, Z., Stroulia, E.: Umldiff: an algorithm for object-oriented design differencing. In: Proceedings of the 20th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 2005, pp. 54–65. ACM (2005)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Vermolen, S.D., Wachsmuth, G., Visser, E. (2012). Reconstructing Complex Metamodel Evolution. In: Sloane, A., Aßmann, U. (eds) Software Language Engineering. SLE 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6940. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28830-2_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28830-2_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-28829-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-28830-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)