Object-Oriented and Conventional

Analysis and Design Methodologies

comparison and Critique


Authors: Robert G.Fichman and Chris
F.Kemerer
MIT
IEEE Computer , 1992,(Oct.):p:22~39

Presentation BY: Jingkui Yang
Contents

Brief Introduction
Analysis Methodologies, tools and comparison
Conventional
Object-oriented
Design Methodologies,Tools and comparison
Object-oriented Conventional
Transition from analysis to design
Overall Critique



Transition
Analysis
Tools
Methodologies
Design
Object-Oriented
Conventional
Diagram of Content
1.Introduction
Object-Orientation programming: 20 years ago.
OOA
OOD
Object-Orientation contains many novel concepts:
called New paradigm for software Development
Debate:
Object_Orientation: Radical Change ?
Conventional : Structured analysis?


Emerge start few years ago
1,Introduction(contd)
Yourdon:


Object-Oriented
methodologists

Revolutionaries
Synthesis
OO is a radical change that renders conventional
Methodologies and ways of thinking about
Design obsolete
OO as simply an accumulation of sound
Software engineering principles that adopters
Can graft onto their existing methodologies
with relative case
Different thinking way,discovery process
And communication between user and analyst
OOSDM :
essentially an elaboration
foundation: structured design
1,Introduction(contd)
Object-oriented approach is a refinement of
some of the best software engineering ideas of
the past
Not a Evolutionary approach !!!

Incremental : minor change
Radical : different principles, draw new
tech.and problem-solving skills

1,Introduction(contd)
OO A&D:
Radical change: strong negative impact
greater expense
risk
different management strategies
More maturity conventional methods existed
Radical or incremental is a crucial to the
future of OO and formulating a transition
strategy.

1, Introduction (contd)
No comprehensive comparing analysis between OOM
and conventional Methodologies
Some comparing on analysis & design of OO.

Loy: insightful commentary on OO versus
Conventional methodologies
Now This research:
fill the gap left by others by analysis several
leading Conventional and OO ADM, point-by-
point comparison. 6 analysis+ 5 design


2, Analysis Methodologies
Conventional
DeMacro Structured analysis
Yourdon modern structured analysis
Martin Information engineering analysis

Object-Oriented
Coad and Yourdon Object-oriented analysis
Shlaer and Mellor Object-oriented analysis
Bailin Object oriented requirements
specifications
2.1 Conventional Methodologies
Late 1960s: system development life cycle(SDLC)
-- Evolution of modern methodologies
Hardware performance
Adoption of high level language

SDLC : bring new order to develop process
Larger/complicated
System built

2.1.1 Structured methodologies
SDLC give develop a measure of control,
but little help in improve the productivity and
quality of analysis and design.
1970s: structured methodologies developed
to promote more effective analysis and more
stable /maintainable designs.
Early : more largely process-oriented:minor on
modeling of entities and data.
Critical contributions: Yourdon/Constantine,
Demarco, Ward/Meller


2.1.1.1 Tools for structured
methodologies
Dataflow diagram(DFD): Process/flow of data
Data_dictionary : definition, encyclopedias
Entity relationship diagram(ERD):
Hierarchy diagram: simple top-down connection
Mini-spec: English specification of logic, process
State-transition diagram: possible states
Structure chart : architecture of system
2.1.1.2 Three main Structured
methodologies in conventionally

Yourdon/Constanine:
Demarcos:
Ward& Meller:
2.1.1.2 Yourdon Constanine
Provided a method for developing a system
architecture that conformed to following
engineering principles:
Loosely coupled modules
Module cohesion
Structure chart : primary tool for modeling a
system design
DataFlow diagram: Modeling process
Hierarchy diagram: Defining data structure

2.1.1.2 DeMarcos
Enlarge structure approach to encompass analysis
Structured analysis:
modeling of existed systems( in DFD)
modeling of the system to be developed
(DFD, MS, DD)
Emphasis on: modeling process
Goal: top-down decomposition of the functions to be
performed by the target system
2.1.1.2 Ward& Mellers
Continuing the structure tradition
Significant extensions to structured analysis
to better support modeling of real-time system
Added ERD and STD to structured analysis
2.1.1.3 modern Structured
Analysis
Yourdon update: different from DeMarcos
No longer recommends modeling of
current implemented system
Adds a preliminary phase to develop an
essential model of the system
Substitutes a technique event partitioning for
top-down functional decomposition as the
preferred technique for constructing DFD
Places more emphasis on info. Modeling(ERD)
and behavior modeling(STD)
Encourages prototyping
2.1.2 Information Engineering
Late 1970s~early 1980s,
planning and modeling of data

More central role in system development.

culminating in the development of data-oriented
methodologies : information engineering
1970s relational database model,
entity-relationship modeling eling
2.1.2.1 Assumptions of
Information Engineering
Two assumptions:
Organizational data provides a more stable
foundation for a system design than
organizational procedure.
Data should be viewed as an organizational
resources independent of the systems
that(current) process the data.

Creation of anew info. Systems subfunction, data administration
To help analyze, define, store, control organizational data.
2.1.2.2 Martin Info.Engineering
A comprehensive methodology :
Extends the data oriented approach
across the entire development life cycle.
Evolved forward through the life cycle from
planning and analysis (Structured , backward from programming)
Four Phases:( p25)
Information strategy planning,
Business area analysis
System design
Construction

Project specific
Business Unit
2.1.2.2 Martin Info. Engineering
Much broader range of analysis techniques
and modeling tools:

Enterprise modeling
Critical-success-factors analysis
Data modeling
Process modeling
Joint-requirements planning
Joint application design
Time-box methodology
Prototyping

2.1.2.2 Tools of Martin
Info.Engineering
Action diagram : detailed procedural logic/structured English
Bubble chart : low-level diagram, aide to normalization
Dataflow diagram:
Data_model diagram: Entities/relational, ERD
Data-Structure diagram:data structure in format appropriate
Encyclopedia: more comprehensive data dictionary
Enterprise model: high level define the functional areas of Org.
Entity-Process matrix: cross reference to entities and process
Process-decomposition diagram: hierarchical chart
Process-dependency diagram:processes diagram with lables
State-transition diagram:


2.2 Object-Oriented Analysis
Methodologies
Goal: development of an accurate and
complete representation of the problem
domain.
Quite young: too early to predict as standard
Three methodologies: in single point in time
( from 1980~1990), not comprehensive
review


2.2.1 Three OO analysis
methodologies
Bailin Object_oriented requirements specification(OOS)
response to a perceived: incompatibility between
conventional structured analysis and object-oriented
design.
Coad and Yourdon object-oriented analysis
Upon the best concepts from Info.modeling, OOPL,
knowledge-based system
Shlaer and Mellor Object-oriented analysis
based on the courses of several years of consulting
practice in information modeling
2.2.2 Tools for 3 OO
methodologies : Bailins
Entity-relationship diagram
Entity_dataflow diagram(EDFD)
variant on conventional DFD each process
contains either an active entity or some
function related to an active entity
Entity dictionary:
a repository of entity names & descriptions


2.2.2. Tools for 3 OO
Methodologies: Coad & Yourdons
Class and object diagram: 5 layers
class & object; structure; subjects; attributes;
service.
Object-state diagram:
simple diagram shows all possible states of an
object and the transitions between states.
Service chart:
flowchart-like diagram of logic within an individual
service

2.2.2 Tools for 3 OO
methodologies: Shlaer & Mellors
Action_dataflow diagram
Domain Chart: domains to the implementation of OOA
Information structure diagram:variant of ERD show objects
Object and attributes description: text description of object
Object-Access Model: synchronous interactions state at global system level
Object-communication Model:asynchronous interactions
Process description: a narrative description of process
Relationship Specification: text description of each relationship
State Model: conform the conventional notation for STD.
Subsystem access Model: synchronous interaction between OAM
Subsystem communication model: asynchronous interaction OCM
Subsystem relationship model: relationship of info. Models


2.2.3 Procedures of 3 OO
Analysis Methodologies:Bailins
Groups functions together only if they
operate on the same data abstraction
Distinguishes between entities & functions
Distinguishes between two classes of entities:
active (important operations)
passive(lesser important: black box).
7 steps procedure:
End result of OOS is an entity relationship
diagram with a hierarchy of entity DFD.
2.2.3 Procedures of 3 OO analysis
methodologies: Bailins
(1) Identify key problem domain entities
(2) Distinguish between active and passive
entities
(3) Establish dataflows between active entities
(4) Decompose entities (or functions)into
subentities and /or functions.
(5) Check for new entities
(6) Group functions under new entities
(7) Assign entities to appropriate domains.

2.2.3 Procedures of 3 OO analysis
Methodologies:Coad & Yourdon
OOA results in 5 layers model of the problem domain
where each level built on previous layers
Define objects and classes:
Define structures: relationship
Define subject areas
Define attributes: characteristics of objects
Define services:
Primary Tools: class& object diagrams,service charts
Similar to: modern structured analysis, Info.Modeling
Differs: providing constructs for modeling exclusive
services and message connection
2.2.3 procedures of 3 OO Analysis
Methodologies :Shlaer & Mellors
Foundation was: Information Modeling
Two other views of target system:
state model & a process model
Three way view of the system(info., state,
process) is proposed as a complete
description of the problem domain.
Support 3 essential principles of OO:
Classification, inheritance encapsulation
Six step procedure
2.2.3 Procedures of 3 OO
Analysis methodologies: Shlaer& Mellor
6 steps:
(1) Develop an information model
(2) Define Object life cycle
(3) Define the dynamics of relationships:Time
(4) Define system dynamics: time & control
(5) Develop process(4) models
(6) Define domains(4) and subsystems.
2.4 Comparison of analysis
methodologies
11 modeling dimensions:
OO versus conventional analysis:
stem from the OO requirement of
encapsulated operations
Conventional: provide tools to create a functional
decomposition of operations, and to model end-to-
end processing sequences. Not true in OOA.
All OOA recognize a need to develop some sort
of model of system operations
2.4 Comparison of analysis
OOA Similarities
Overlap significantly(same concept but
different notations, terminology)
Entities(object) and relationship establish a
foundation for later stage of analysis
Similar RED contents
Coad & Yourdon refer explicitly to:
OO concepts : inheritance and object
decomposition

2.4 Comparison of analysis
Methodologies
OOA Differences: 3 areas
Depiction of entity states
Emphasis in Shlaer & Mellor
Coad & Yourdon some
Bailin: no formal means ( STD ????)
Definition of exclusive services
Coad&Yourdon, Shlaer most detailed
Bailin: less details
Attention to attribute modeling:
Bailin low emphasis, but Coad & Yourdon did more

2.4 Comparison of OO analysis
Methodologies
OOA Differences
Shlaer & Mellor support some concepts not
address by Coad/Yourdon , or Bailin
A distinction between asynchronous and
synchronous control
The use of timers to generate future events
The concepts of a dynamic relationship and
its role in handling contention between
concurrent processes.
2.4 Comparison of Analysis
Methodologies
OOA: incremental versus radical change
radical departure from older process-
oriented : in DeMarco structured analysis
Only incremental change from: data-
oriented : Martin Information engineering
Here all OOA contain heavy information
modeling component.
Significant change: Shlaer & Mellor OOA
emphasis on modeling object life cycle.
3, Design Methodologies
Design: the process of mapping system
requirements defined during analysis to an
abstract representation of a specific system-
based implementation .meeting cost and
performance constraints.

Wasserman et.al. OO structured design(OOSD)
Booch OO Design
Wirfs-Brock et.al.
Responsibility driven design(RDD)
3, Design Methodologies
Conventioal Design
Yourdon and Constrantines structured design
Martin information engineering design
Object-Oriented Design
Wasserman et al. object-oriented structured
design
Booch object-oriented design
Wirfs-brock et al. responsibility driven design
3.1 Tools and procedures steps
of OOD: Wassermans OOSD
OO Structured Design:
Goal:
Provide a standard design notation that
can support every software design( OO
& conventional approach both)
Provide Detailed notation for describing an
architectural design.
Primary Tool: OO structured chart
( classical structure chart+ notations )

3.1 Tools & Procedures steps of OO
design: Wassermans OOSD
OO structure chart:
used show multiple inheritance, message
passing, polymorphism, dynamic binding.
OOSD:
supports concept of monitor ( asynchronous
processes in real-time systems)
Provides a foundation for representing design
decisions associated with the physical design
3.1 Tools & Procedures steps for OO
design: Booch OOD
Pioneered the field of OOD
Ada Language specific in 1980s
Expand and generalize: alternative of
structured design not extension of it.
Reluctant to prescribe a fixed ordering of phases
for OOD.
4 major steps must be performed
identify classes and objects
Identify the semantics of classes & objects.
Identify relationships between classes & objects
Implement classes and objects.

3.1, Tools and Procedures of OOD :
Booch OOD
Tools:
Class diagrams & class templates
Module diagram & templates
Object diagrams: dynamics of some objects
Timing diagram: control and ordering of events
Operation templates: services
Process diagrams & templates
State transition diagram


3.1 Tools and procedures of OOD:
Wirfs-Brock: RDD
Responsibility-driven design(RDD)
Based on a client-server model of computing
Client,servers are different objects.
Services and responsibilities correspond to
methods.
Focus of attention during design on contacts
between client and server.
More on object interactions and encapsulation
Two phases and 6 steps

3.1 Tools and Procedures of OO
Design: Wirfs_Brock RDD
Find classes
Find Responsibilities and assign to classes
Find collaborations
First Exploration phase
Define hierarchies
Define subsystem
Define protocols Second analysis Phase
2 phases and 6 steps
3.1 Tools and procedures of
OOD: Wrfs_Brock: RRD
Tools
Class cards: physical card to record text describing
classes
Class Specification : expanded of class cards
Collaborations graph :diagram with paths
Hierarchy diagram : inheritance relationships
Subsystem card : physical card for record
Subsystem specification: same as class specification
Venn diagram : overlap of responsibilities

3.2 Comparison of design
Methodologies
OOD versus Conventional Design
No conventional support:
definition of classes, inheritance, methods
or message protocols.
Both provide tools that define a hierarchy of
modules
Object is primary unit of modularity in OOD
modules only contain procedural code in
conventional design
3.2 Comparison of design
methodologies
OOD versus conventional design
Greatest overlap: Booch OOD and information
Engineering
( tool for defining end-to-end processing sequences)
( detailed definition of procedural logic).


3.2 Comparison of design
Methodologies : OOD Differences
In data design
Booch detailed procedure for designing data.
Wasserman, Wirfs_Brock little on data design.
Level of detail in describing the process of OOD
Wirfs_Brock: thorough description of design process
Booch offers less
Wasserman: No procedural description
Level of detail provided by diagram notations
Wasserman, Booch :comprehensive notations
Wirfs_Brock : less
3.2 Comparison of OOD
Incremental /radical change?
OOD:
clearly a radical change from process or
data-oriented methodologies
Important is not whether OO concepts are
radically new in some absolute sense, but
rather whether they are radically new to the
population of potential adopters?

4, Transition from analysis to design
Analysis: a process of extracting and
codifying user requirements and
establishing an accurate model of the
problem domain.
Design: process of mapping requirements
to a system implementation that conforms
to desired cost, performance, and quality
parameters

4, Transition from analysis to Design
Blurred line between analysis & design
Process of design leads to better
understanding of requirements
Can be performed iteratively, if not concurrently.
No direct & obvious mapping exists between
structured analysis and structured design.
OO, mapping from analysis to design does
appear to be potentially more isomorphic.
5, Overall Critique
OO are less mature than conventional methodologies,
none of OO achieved the status of a widely
recognized standard
The most coarse-grained ,formally defined entities in
OO are objects and classes.
None of the OO review here provided a specific
model for describe global processes end-to-end.
System partitioning, end-to-end process modeling ,
harvesting reuse appear to be strong candidates for
development.

5, Overall Critique
Conventional methodologies fall at different
places along the incremental-radical
continuum.
In Design, all conventional methodologies revert to
a process-oriented view in establishing the
architecture of program modules.
Object orientation will likely be viewed as radical
change.
Many favors OO as a better idea for software
development