Cg 2011

902 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
902
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
134
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Cg 2011

  1. 1. Model Driven Development: What went right? What went wrong? What needs to happen?<br />Tony Clark<br />Middlesex University<br />London, UK<br />t.n.clark@mdx.ac.uk<br />http://www.eis.mdx.ac.uk/staffpages/tonyclark/<br />
  2. 2. Overview<br />The problems with Modelling….<br />What is MDD?<br />What did MDD promise?<br />An idealized model based industry.<br />How did we get here?<br />An attempt.<br />Are we there yet?<br />2<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  3. 3. What is Modelling?<br />Contrast Programming and Specification.<br />Modelling lies in-between.<br />How do people do it?<br />Leads us to some requirements…<br />3<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  4. 4. System Building: Endogeneous Descriptions<br />Start with nothing:<br />Add extra information incrementally:<br />It does what it does and nothing more:<br />If it is wrong, modify it:<br />4<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  5. 5. System Specification: Exogeneous Descriptions<br />Start off with everything:<br />Add constraints:<br />It does anything but must include required behaviour:<br />5<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  6. 6. The Exo-Endo Divide<br />A problem with specification/modelling technologies.<br />It is easy to under specify or over specify.<br />It is difficult to check exo-endo match.<br />6<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  7. 7. Model Driven Exo-Endo Problems<br />Cannot execute the models.<br />Cannot generate code from the models.<br />Ambiguous models lead to wrong choices.<br />Example: models are just code-in-pictures.<br />Example: models are just diagrams.<br />7<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  8. 8. Peter Naur and Theory Building<br /><ul><li>Systems are more than just code.
  9. 9. Developers should understand systems in terms of theories.
  10. 10. A theory contains facts aboutthe system.
  11. 11. Theories are personal.
  12. 12. Theories are built byinteracting with the ‘real world’.</li></ul>Theory<br />8<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  13. 13. Domain Specific Theories<br />Multiple theories at work.<br />A theory of the problem domain.<br />A theory of the solution domain.<br />A mapping between them.<br />Domain Theory<br />ImplementationTheory<br />9<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  14. 14. Theory Encoding leads to a Problem<br />Theory<br />Theories must be encoded in technology.<br />Bound to be incomplete.<br />Using domain specific technologieswill help.<br />10<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  15. 15. Domain Specific vs General Purpose<br />Domain <br />Specific<br />Models and implementationlanguages reduce the theorymismatch.<br />Try to be as domain specificas possible.<br />This introduces the need fora transformation to implementation technology.<br />Implementation<br />Specific<br />11<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  16. 16. A Whole Space of Problems<br />Domain <br />Specific<br />Domain Theory<br />Implementation<br />Specific<br />ImplementationTheory<br />12<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  17. 17. A Technology Space<br />DomainSpecific<br />IDEAL<br />DSLs<br />UML+Profiles<br />Lisp<br />UML<br />FP<br />Formal Methods<br />Java<br />TheoryCompletion<br />13<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  18. 18. Requirements on MD Technologies<br />Theory Building.<br />Domain Specific Representations.<br />Fill the gap.<br />Ease of transition Problem to Solution.<br />Code Gen 2011<br />14<br />
  19. 19. What is MDD?<br />Using models in the development process.<br />Trying to close the gaps identified above.<br />Essentially two main approaches:<br />MDA, code generation.<br />Run-time models.<br />15<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  20. 20. Promises, Promises, ...<br />Faster development time.<br />Technology independence.<br />Agility.<br />Better quality products and processes.<br />Ease of maintenance.<br />Domain expert involvement.<br />Cost reduction.<br />Automated Testing.<br />16<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  21. 21. The Promise of MDA (or how it was sold to us)<br />OMG Position Paper (2003): Driving business agility with Model Driven Architecture<br /> http://www.omg.org/mda/mda_files/3302_AccelDev_PP.pdf<br />17<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  22. 22. Model Driven Nirvana<br />If only we could do:<br />Enterprise Architecture<br />Executable Modelling.<br />Theory Building.<br />Design languages for each domain.<br />Round trip.<br />Reusability.<br />Views.<br />Queries.<br />Interoperability.<br />18<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  23. 23. The Ideal Model Driven Enterprise<br />Aspects of Enterprise Architecture.<br />Use-Cases for the Model Driven Enterprise.<br />The Business Context.<br />The Business Drivers.<br />Refinement.<br />Capability Requirements.<br />Technology Requirements.<br />19<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  24. 24. ZachmanFramework<br />20<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  25. 25. Use Cases for the Model Driven Enterprise<br />Effective Business Execution.<br />Agility.<br />Business Change Management.<br />Acquisition and Mergers.<br />Quality Management.<br />Resource Management.<br />IT System Generation<br />21<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  26. 26. The Business Context<br />Business<br />Regulations<br />Events<br />Application<br />Biz Context<br />Directives<br />Technology<br />22<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  27. 27. The Business Drivers<br />Information<br />Resources<br />Structure<br />Goal<br />Policies<br />Model<br />Model<br />Business<br />Regulations<br />Events<br />Application<br />Biz Context<br />Directives<br />Technology<br />23<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  28. 28. Refinement<br />Information<br />Resources<br />Model<br />Structure<br />Goal<br />Policies<br />Model<br />Model<br />Model<br />Model<br />Model<br />Business<br />Regulations<br />Goal<br />Goal<br />Events<br />Application<br />Biz Context<br />Directives<br />Technology<br />24<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  29. 29. Capability Requirements<br />Information<br />Resources<br />Model<br />Structure<br />Goal<br />Policies<br />Model<br />Model<br />Model<br />Model<br />Model<br />Business<br />Regulations<br />Goal<br />Goal<br />Events<br />Application<br />Biz Context<br />Directives<br />Technology<br />25<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  30. 30. Technology Requirements<br />Information<br />Resources<br />Model<br />Structure<br />Goal<br />Policies<br />Model<br />Model<br />Model<br />Model<br />Model<br />Business<br />Regulations<br />Goal<br />Goal<br />Events<br />Application<br />Biz Context<br />Directives<br />Technology<br />26<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  31. 31. Business Intelligence<br />Information<br />Resources<br />Model<br />Structure<br />Goal<br />Policies<br />Model<br />Model<br />Model<br />Model<br />Model<br />Business<br />Regulations<br />Goal<br />Goal<br />Events<br />Application<br />Biz Context<br />Directives<br />Technology<br />27<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  32. 32. Requirements on MD Technologies<br />Integrated Business to Technology stack.<br />BI (reverse engineered dynamic data).<br />Event-driven, reactive.<br />Adaptive.<br />All-code or No-code?<br />Dynamic update.<br />Code Gen 2011<br />28<br />
  33. 33. Where are we?<br />Gartner Hype Cycle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hype_cycle<br />29<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  34. 34. UML: The Dominant Technology <br />Relatively Mature.<br />Hundreds of tools, many free.<br />Interoperable (?).<br />Taught in Universities.<br />Basis for MDA.<br />Profiles.<br />Code Gen 2011<br />30<br />
  35. 35. How is UML Used?<br />Bob Maksimchuk, Principal Consultant, Project Pragmatics, Rmaksimchuk@ProjectPragmatics.com<br />31<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  36. 36. Which Parts of UML?<br />Bob Maksimchuk, Principal Consultant, Project Pragmatics, Rmaksimchuk@ProjectPragmatics.com<br />32<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  37. 37. Other Technologies<br />System modelling: SysML, MODAF, TOGAF, ArchiMate, etc.<br />Transformations: QVT, ATL, Kermeta, etc.<br />Domain Specific Modeling Tools: MetaEdit+, Eclipse Modeling Project, XMF-Mosaic, etc.<br />Language-Oriented Programming: projectional languages, Xtext; Spoofax; XMF.<br />Code Gen 2011<br />33<br />
  38. 38. How did we get here?<br />[- 1980s] Programming languages.<br />[1980s] CASE Tools.<br />[1980s] OO Languages.<br />[1985-1995] OO Methods.<br />[1995-] OO Standards.<br />[2000-] Model Driven Architecture.<br />[2002-] Model Transformations.<br />[2003-] Meta-Technologies.<br />[2005-] Software Language Engineering.<br />[2005-] Scripting Languages.<br />34<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  39. 39. Xactium: Personal Experience<br />XMF: The Ideal Endogenous Modelling Platform?<br />XMF-Mosaic: The Ideal Exogenous Modelling Platform?<br />Closing the Endo-Exo Divide?<br />Technology grew out of UML 2.0 work.<br />Language-Oriented Modelling Approach: Lifting the domain-specific abstraction.<br />35<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  40. 40. Language-Oriented Modelling<br />Code Gen 2011<br />36<br />
  41. 41. Where’s My Jetpack? Simon Helsen,Arthur Ryman, DiomidisSpinellis, IEEE Software, Special Issue Software Development Tools 2008<br />37<br />Code Gen 2011<br />
  42. 42. Xcore Meta-Structure<br />
  43. 43. Xcore Meta-Behaviour<br />
  44. 44. XMF Textual DSLs<br />Code Gen 2011<br />40<br />
  45. 45. XMF-Mosaic Graphical DSLs<br />Code Gen 2011<br />41<br />
  46. 46. XMF-Mosaic<br />A demo.<br />Code Gen 2011<br />42<br />
  47. 47. Are we there yet?<br />Requirements:<br />Theories: richer languages.<br />Domain Specific: match the problem domain.<br />Execution: program with models at all levels.<br />Reflection: self aware tools.<br />Meta: arbitrary extension.<br />Semantics: meaningful technologies.<br />43<br />Code Gen 2011<br />

×