Sefsis III

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group
Software Engineering for Software-Intensive Systems: III The Development Life Cycle
Assistant Professor Dr. Holger Giese Software Engineering Group Room E 3.165 Tel. 60-3321 Email: hg@upb.de
Outline
I Introduction II Foundations III The Development Life Cycle IV Requirements V Analysis & Design VI Implementation VII Verification & Validation VIIISummary and Outlook
Holger Giese
WS05/06 Software Engineering for Software-Intensive Systems III The Development Life Cycle
III-2
III The Development Life Cycle

III.1 III.2 III.3 III.4 III.5 III.6 III.7 Software Engineering Life Cycle Models System Engineering Life Cycle Models Embedded System Life Cycle Models Advanced Life Cycle Models & MDD Process Improvement Discussion & Summary Bibliography
Holger Giese
III-3
III.1 Software Engineering Life Cycle Models

Waterfall Model Prototyping V Model Spiral Model RUP
Holger Giese
III-4
Characteristics of Software Development Methodologies

Requirements definition Analysis
(Historic) Waterfall Model

Design Coding (+ Unit Test) System test Installation and conversion Operation and maintenance
Holger Giese
III-5
The Prototyping Process

REQUIREMENTS DETERMINATION BY CUSTOMER PROTOTYPE DESIGM PROTOTYPE IMPLEMENTATION PROTOTYPE EVALUATION BY CUSTOMER REQUIREMENTS FULFILLED ? YES SYSTEM TESTS AND ACCEPTANCE TESTS SYSTEM CONVERSION SYSTEM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Holger Giese
[Galin2004]
NO
REQUIREMENTS FOR CORRECTIONS, CHANGES AND ADDITIONS
III-6
V Development Process
Requirement analysis
Requirements documents
service
certified system Specification certification
specification
verified system
coarse design
system design spec.
test
integrated system
detailed design
design
integration test tested modules
Implementation
modul test
system model, construction

Holger Giese
modules
system, quality management

III-7
Spiral Model Process

Negotiation
negotiation evaluation
[Boehm1988]
objectives,
alternatives, strategies, constraints Make-orBuy, risk analysis SE-Process for partial or full system!
deployment
cumulative cost area end of cycling: consensus
Evaluation
alternatives:
Construction & Test

any
planning & (re) organization

progress: #cycles
Holger Giese
construction & test
Planning
Review, Plan
next phases
III-8
Rational Unified Process (RUP)

[RUP1999] iterations
Holger Giese
III-9

Holger Giese
III-10
Life Cycle of System Engineering

[Sage&Armstrong2000]
Holger Giese
III-11
Alternative View
Holger Giese
III-12
Holger Giese
III-13

Holger Giese
III-14
III.3 Embedded System Life Cycle Models

(1) 3V Model (2) Multiple V Model
Holger Giese
III-15
(1) 3V Model (1/2)

(1) Embedded software
Compiled for host Compiled for target platform
[Broekman&Notenboom2003]
(2) Processor
High performance host Target platform emulator
(3) Rest of the embedded system

Simulated on the host Experimental hardware platform Prototype hardware platform
(4) Plant
Statically (signal generator) Dynamically (simulation model)
Holger Giese
III-16
3V Model (2/2)
Model: covers the definition and simulation of the overall system functionality

Implementation aspects are not considered hardware specific parameters become important deployment & message scheduling local design addresses the scheduling of tasks on each node typical problem: limited performance of the target system
http://www.vmars.tuwien.ac.at/projects/setta
http://www.vmars.tuwien.ac.at/projects/setta/docs/meetings/020121p/final_document.pdf
Prototype: is characterized by rapid prototyping
Final product: addresses the system development for the final target hardware
Holger Giese
III-17
(2) Multiple V Model
Holger Giese
III-18
Multiple V Model (2/2)
Holger Giese
III-19

Holger Giese
III-20
III.4 Advanced Life Cycle Models & MDD

(1) MDA (2) Y-Model (3) Platform-Based Design
Holger Giese
III-21
(1) MDA
An approach to IT system specification that separates the specification of system functionality from the specification of the implementation of that functionality on a particular technology platform Design once, build it on any platform
Platform Independent Model (PIM)
UML,
Platform Specific Model (PSM)
Platforms (e.g., CORBA Profile, )
Code (+ Platform, )
C++ (+ CORBA, )
Holger Giese
III-22
Early Problem Detection in MDA
Platform Independent Model (PIM) Check platform independent properties
Models permit to detect some problems early on:
Property-preserving refinement (via automatic generation + annotations)
Platform Specific Model (PSM)
Check platform dependent properties
Reduced defect detection costs Reduced costs for defect removal
Traceability and portability
Property-preserving refinement (via automatic generation)
Code (+ Platform, )
Properties still hold
But But this this is is a a vision vision only only for for softwaresoftwareintensive intensive systems! systems!
III-23
Holger Giese
(2) Y-Model
Manual coding
[Camus&Dion2003] http://www.safeair.org/
http://www.safeair.org/description/D4-2_final_Report_v1.7.pdf
Programming code Standard automatic code generator Qualified code generator Design verifier
Generating code No code test (Automated code test) Automated design verification Time
III-24
Holger Giese
Application Example: Airbus

Tool: Safety Critical Applications Development Environment (SCADE)
Application: A340/600 FCSC (Flight Control Secondary Computer): Result: 70 % automatically generated code 50 % reduction in development cost reduction in modification cycle time by factor 3
Source: Esterel Technologies Holger Giese
III-25
(3) Platform-Based Design

Requirements Verification automatic (program analysis/model checking)
Environment
Model
Application Space
Application Instance Implementation
automatic (compilation/synthesis)
Platform Mapping System Platform
Resources Platform Design-Space Export

Platform Instance
Architectural Space
Holger Giese
III-26
Idea
[Sangiovanni-Vincentelli2002]
Platform:
a
family of architectures satisfying a set of constraints imposed to allow the reuse of hardware and software components.
Platform-based design:
meet-in-the-middle
approach: In the top-down design flow, designers map an instance of the upper platform to an instance of the lower, and propagate design constraints. exposing key resource limitations hiding inessential implementation details
Holger Giese
III-27
Platform-Based Design
Top-Down:
Map an instance of the upper platform onto an lower platform considering appropriate constrains.
Bottom-Up:
Find the appropriate platform levels. Define platform level parameters
Platform instances Platform abstraction levels
Holger Giese
III-28

Holger Giese
III-29
Systems Product Lifecycle

PURE BASIC
RESEARCH
GROWTH
MATURITY
DETERIORATION
MARKET INTRODUCTION
DEATH
I O R
UE N VE RE
?
IN VE ST ME N
O PR
FI
?
T
BREAKEVEN POINT
CONCEPTUAL DEFINITION PRODUCTION OERATIONAL

Holger Giese
DIVESTMENT
III-30
Process Management
Why? The quality outcome and timeliness of the system development is highly influenced by the quality of the process used to acquire, develop, and maintain it. Common Misconceptions I dont need process, I have

really good people advanced technology an experienced manager interferes with creativity equals bureaucracy + regimentation isnt needed when building prototypes is only useful on large projects hinders agility in fast-moving markets costs too much
Process

http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/general/general.html III-31
Holger Giese
The CMMI Project

The CMM Integration Project was formed to: Establish a framework to integrate current and future models Build an initial set of integrated models CMMI models that cover both systems engineering and software engineering might best be described as "engineering models." They are intended to cover the enterprise and include all the processes that result in products or services.
The source models for the CMMI include:
Software: CMM for Software v2.0 Draft C, Systems Engineering: EIA 731 Systems Engineering
Holger Giese
III-32
CMMI Model Representations

Staged
ML5 ML4 ML3 ML2 ML 1 Capability 1 2 3 4
0
PA
Continuous
5
Organization
Holger Giese
PA
PA
Process
III-33
Level Optimizing
Process Characteristics
In
Management Visibility
Out
Focus is on continuous quantitative improvement
Quantitatively Managed
Process is measured and controlled
In
Out
Defined
Process is characterized for the organization and is proactive
In
Out
Managed
Process is characterized for projects and is often reactive Process is unpredictable, poorly controlled, and reactive
In
Out
Initial
In
Out
Holger Giese
III-34
Level Optimizing
Process Characteristics
Probability
Predicted Performance
Target N-z
Focus is on continuous quantitative improvement
Time/$/... Probability
Quantitatively Managed
Process is measured and controlled
Defined
Process is characterized for the organization and is proactive Process is characterized for projects and is often reactive Process is unpredictable, poorly controlled, and reactive
Target N+a
Managed
Target N-x
Target N-y
Probability
Time/$/...
Target N
Initial
Time/$/...
Holger Giese
III-35
Risk

Holger Giese
III-36
III.6 Discussion & Summary

We have nearly the same life cycle models in the different disciplines. Advanced life cycle models and modeldriven approaches try to increase the degree of automation and decrease timeto-market. Especially for organizations which develop large-scale software-intensive systems process improvement is crucial.
Holger Giese
III-37
III.7 Bibliography (Additional ones)

[Boehm1988] Barry W. Boehm. A Spiral Model of Software Development and Enhancement. IEEE Computer, 21(5):61 72, 1988. [Camus&Dion2003] Jean-Luis Camus and Bernard Dion. Efficient development of airborne software with scade suite. 2003. [Galin2004] D. Galin, Software Quality Assurance: From theory to implementation. Harlow, England: Pearson Addison Wesley, 2004. [RUP1999] Ivar Jacobson, Grady Booch, and James Rumbaugh. The Unified Software Development Process. The Addison-Wesley Object Technology Series. AddisonWesley, January 1999. [Sage&Armstrong2000] Andrew P. Sage and James E. Armstrong. Introduction to Systems Engineering. Wiley Series in Systems Engineering and Management. WileyInterscience, March 2000.
Holger Giese
III-38

Sefsis III

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sefsis III

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

III The Development Life Cycle

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

III.1 Software Engineering Life Cycle Models

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

Characteristics of Software Development Methodologies

(Historic) Waterfall Model

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

The Prototyping Process

REQUIREMENTS FOR CORRECTIONS, CHANGES AND ADDITIONS

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

certified system Specification certification

system design spec.

integration test tested modules

system model, construction

system, quality management

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

Spiral Model Process

Construction & Test

planning & (re) organization

construction & test

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

Rational Unified Process (RUP)

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

III The Development Life Cycle

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

Life Cycle of System Engineering

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

III The Development Life Cycle

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

III.3 Embedded System Life Cycle Models

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

(1) 3V Model (1/2)

(3) Rest of the embedded system

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

Prototype: is characterized by rapid prototyping

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

(2) Multiple V Model

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

Multiple V Model (2/2)

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

III The Development Life Cycle

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

III.4 Advanced Life Cycle Models & MDD

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

Platform Independent Model (PIM)

Platform Specific Model (PSM)

Platforms (e.g., CORBA Profile, )

University of Paderborn Software Engineering Group

Early Problem Detection in MDA

Platform Independent Model (PIM) Check platform independent properties

Models permit to detect some problems early on:

Property-preserving refinement (via automatic generation + annotations)

Platform Specific Model (PSM)

Check platform dependent properties

Reduced defect detection costs Reduced costs for defect removal

Traceability and portability

Property-preserving refinement (via automatic generation)

Properties still hold