Cs 1023 lec 3 architecture (week 1)

Copyright © Richard N. Taylor, Nenad Medvidovic, and Eric M. Dashofy. All rights reserved.
Architectures
in Context
Software Architecture
Lecture 2

Foundations, Theory, and PracticeSoftware ArchitectureSoftware Architecture
2
Fundamental Understanding
 Architecture is a set of principal design decisions about a
software system
 Three fundamental understandings of software
architecture
Every application has an architecture
Every application has at least one architect
Architecture is not a phase of development

3
Wrong View: Architecture as a
Phase
Treating architecture as a phase denies its
foundational role in software development
More than “high-level design”
Architecture is also represented, e.g., by object code,
source code, …

4
Context of Software Architecture
 Requirements
 Design
 Implementation
 Analysis and Testing
 Evolution
 Development Process

5
Requirements Analysis
 Traditional SE suggests requirements analysis should
remain unsullied by any consideration for a design
 However, without reference to existing architectures it
becomes difficult to assess practicality, schedules, or
costs
In building architecture we talk about specific rooms…
…rather than the abstract concept “means for
providing shelter”
 In engineering new products come from the observation
of existing solution and their limitations

6
New Perspective on Requirements
Analysis
 Existing designs and architectures provide the solution
vocabulary
 Our understanding of what works now, and how it works,
affects our wants and perceived needs
 The insights from our experiences with existing systems
helps us imagine what might work and
enables us to assess development time and costs
  Requirements analysis and consideration of design
must be pursued at the same time

7
Non-Functional Properties (NFP)
 NFPs are the result of architectural choices
 NFP questions are raised as the result of architectural
choices
 Specification of NFP might require an architectural
framework to even enable their statement
 An architectural framework will be required for
assessment of whether the properties are achievable

8
The Twin Peaks Model

9
Design and Architecture
 Design is an activity that pervades software development
 It is an activity that creates part of a system’s architecture
 Typically in the traditional Design Phase decisions concern
A system’s structure
Identification of its primary components
Their interconnections
 Architecture denotes the set of principal design decisions
about a system
That is more than just structure

10
Architecture-Centric Design
 Traditional design phase suggests translating the
requirements into algorithms, so a programmer can
implement them
 Architecture-centric design
stakeholder issues
decision about use of COTS component
overarching style and structure
package and primary class structure
deployment issues
post implementation/deployment issues

11
Design Techniques
 Basic conceptual tools
Separation of concerns
Abstraction
Modularity
 A widely adapted strategy
Object-oriented design

12
Object-Oriented Design (OOD)
 Objects
Main abstraction entity in OOD
Encapsulations of state with functions for accessing
and manipulating that state

13
Pros and Cons of OOD
 Pros
UML modeling notation
Design patterns
 Cons
Provides only
One level of encapsulation (the object)
One notion of interface
One type of explicit connector (procedure call)
 Even message passing is realized via procedure calls
OO programming language might dictate important design
decisions

14
Implementation
 The objective is to create machine-executable source
code
That code should be faithful to the architecture
Alternatively, it may adapt the architecture
How much adaptation is allowed?
Architecturally-relevant vs. -unimportant
adaptations
It must fully develop all outstanding details of the
application

15
Faithful Implementation
 All of the structural elements found in the architecture
are implemented in the source code
 Source code must not utilize major new computational
elements that have no corresponding elements in the
architecture
 Source code must not contain new connections between
architectural elements that are not found in the
architecture
 Is this realistic?
Overly constraining?
What if we deviate from this?

16
Unfaithful Implementation
 The implementation does have an architecture
It is latent, as opposed to what is documented.
 Failure to recognize the distinction between planned and
implemented architecture
robs one of the ability to reason about the
application’s architecture in the future
misleads all stakeholders regarding what they believe
they have as opposed to what they really have
makes any development or evolution strategy that is
based on the documented (but inaccurate)
architecture doomed to failure

17
Implementation Strategies
 Generative techniques
e.g. parser generators
 Frameworks
collections of source code with identified places
where the engineer must “fill in the blanks”
 Middleware
CORBA, DCOM, RPC, …
 Reuse-based techniques
COTS, open-source, in-house
 Writing all code manually

18
Analysis and Testing
 Analysis and testing are activities undertaken to assess
the qualities of an artifact
 The earlier an error is detected and corrected the lower
the aggregate cost
 Rigorous representations are required for analysis, so
precise questions can be asked and answered

19
Analysis of Architectural Models
 Formal architectural model can be examined for internal
consistency and correctness
 An analysis on a formal model can reveal
Component mismatch
Incomplete specifications
Undesired communication patterns
Deadlocks
Security flaws
 It can be used for size and development time estimations

20
Analysis of Architectural Models
(cont’d)
 Architectural model
may be examined for consistency with requirements
may be used in determining analysis and testing
strategies for source code
may be used to check if an implementation is faithful

21
Evolution and Maintenance
 All activities that chronologically follow the release of an
application
 Software will evolve
Regardless of whether one is using an
architecture-centric development process or not
 The traditional software engineering approach to maintenance
is largely ad hoc
Risk of architectural decay and overall quality degradation
 Architecture-centric approach
Sustained focus on an explicit, substantive, modifiable,
faithful architectural model

22
Architecture-Centric Evolution
Process
 Motivation
 Evaluation or assessment
 Design and choice of approach
 Action
includes preparation for the next round of adaptation

23
Processes
 Traditional software process discussions make the
process activities the focal point
 In architecture-centric software engineering the product
becomes the focal point
 No single “right” software process for architecture-centric
software engineering exists

24
Turbine – A New Visualization
Model
 Goals of the visualization
Provide an intuitive sense of
 Project activities at any given time
 Including concurrency of types of development activities
 The “information space” of the project
Show centrality of the products
 (Hopefully) Growing body of artifacts
 Allow for the centrality of architecture
 But work equally well for other approaches,
including “dysfunctional” ones
Effective for indicating time, gaps, duration of activities
Investment (cost) indicators

25
Coding
Design
Requirements
Testing
Simplistic Waterfall,
Side perspective
time
The Turbine Model
“Core” of project
artifacts
Radius of rotor indicates
level of staffing at time t
Gap between rotors
indicates no project
activity for that ∆t
ti
Software Architecture: Foundations, Theory, and Practice; Richard N. Taylor, Nenad Medvidovic, and Eric M. Dashofy; © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Reprinted with permission.

26
Cross-section at time ti
Design
(activity)
Requirements
Design
doc

27
The Turbine Model
Waterfall example,
Angled perspective
time

28
A Richer Example
S1
Design/Build/
Requirements
Test/Build/
Deploy
Assess/…
Requirements/Architecture
assessment/Planning
Build/Design/
Requirements/Test
time

29
A Sample Cross-Section

30
A Cross-Section at Project End

31
Volume Indicates Where Time was
Spent
Design/Build/
Requirements
Test/Build/
Deploy
Assess/…
Requirements/
Architecture Assessment / Planning
Build/Design/
Requirements/Test

32
A Technically Strong Product-Line
Project
Assessment
Parameterization
Customization
Deployment
Capture of new work
Other

33
Visualization Summary
 It is illustrative, not prescriptive
 It is an aid to thinking about what’s going on in a project
 Can be automatically generated based on input of
monitored project data
 Can be extended to illustrate development of the
information space (artifacts)
The preceding slides have focused primarily on the
development activities

34
Processes Possible in this Model
 Traditional, straight-line waterfall
 Architecture-centric development
 DSSA-based project
 Agile development
 Dysfunctional process

35
Summary (1)
 A proper view of software architecture affects every
aspect of the classical software engineering activities
 The requirements activity is a co-equal partner with
design activities
 The design activity is enriched by techniques that exploit
knowledge gained in previous product developments
 The implementation activity
is centered on creating a faithful implementation of
the architecture
utilizes a variety of techniques to achieve this in a
cost-effective manner

36
Summary (2)
 Analysis and testing activities can be focused on and
guided by the architecture
 Evolution activities revolve around the product’s
architecture.
 An equal focus on process and product results from a
proper understanding of the role of software architecture

Cs 1023 lec 3 architecture (week 1)

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Cs 1023 lec 3 architecture (week 1) (20)

More from stanbridge (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Cs 1023 lec 3 architecture (week 1)

Editor's Notes