Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Open Computer Science

Editor-in-Chief: van den Broek, Egon

1 Issue per year

Open Access
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Supporting multiple configuration sources using abstraction

Milan Nosáľ
  • Department of Computers and Informatics, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Informatics, Technical University of Košice, Letná 9, 042 00, Košice, Slovakia
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Jaroslav Porubän
  • Department of Computers and Informatics, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Informatics, Technical University of Košice, Letná 9, 042 00, Košice, Slovakia
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2012-11-04 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s13537-012-0015-7


Software engineers have long recognized the need to shift focus from developing systems to developing system families. One way to develop software family is to develop configurable systems. A configuration (initial settings of a program), written in application-specific language, can be expressed using many different formats, such as XML, YAML, attribute-oriented programming, etc., each one having pros and cons. Often the target group of users is too wide to meet their expectations by using only one format. This paper analyzes options that system providers have in supporting multiple configuration languages or sources. An enhanced abstraction tool is chosen as the best solution, and its architecture is briefly presented. The main contribution to the tool’s design is advocation of the declarative representation of mapping of input languages to output format.

Keywords: configuration; multiple sources; configuration language; declarative approach to language mapping

  • [1] Bennett K., Layzell P., Budgen D., Brereton P., Macaulay L., Munro M., Service-based software: the future for flexible software, In: Proceedings of the Seventh Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, ser. APSEC’ 00. Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society, 214, 2000 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/APSEC.2000.896702Google Scholar

  • [2] Dreiling A., Rosemann M., van der Aalst W., Heuser L., Schulz K., Model-based software configuration: patterns and languages, EJIS, 15, 583–600, 2006 Google Scholar

  • [3] Gross P.H., Ginzberg M.J., Barriers to the adoption of application software packages, Information Systems Working Papers Series, 4, 211–226, 1984 Google Scholar

  • [4] Hui B., Liaskos S., Mylopoulos J., Requirements analysis for customizable software goals-skills-preferences framework, In: Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering. Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society, 117, 2003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICRE.2003.1232743CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [5] Lucas H.C., Walton E.J., Ginzberg M.J., Implementing packaged software, Manage. Inf. Syst. Q., 12, 537–549, 1988 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/249129CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [6] Mackay W.E., Triggers and barriers to customizing software, In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: Reaching through technology, ser. CHI’ 91. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 153–160, 1991 http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/108844.108867CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [7] Mernik M., Heering J., Sloane A.M., When and how to develop domain-specific languages, ACM Comput. Surv., 37, 316–344, 2005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1118890.1118892CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [8] Newkirk J., Vorontsov A.A., How.NET’s Custom Attributes Affect Design, IEEE Software, 19, 18–20, 2002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MS.2002.1032846CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [9] Passos E.B., Sousa J.W.S., Clua E.W.G., Montenegro A., Murta L., Smart composition of game objects using dependency injection, Comput. Entertain., 7, 53:1–53:15, 2010 Google Scholar

  • [10] Porubän J., Forgác M., Behálek M., Annotation based parser generator, Computer Science and Information Systems: Special Issue on Advances in Languages, Related Technologies and Applications, 7, 291–307, 2010 Google Scholar

  • [11] Rouvoy R., Merle P., Leveraging Component-Oriented Programming with Attribute-Oriented Programming, In: 11th International ECOOP Workshop on Component-Oriented Programming (WCOP’06), 11, 10–18, 2006 Google Scholar

  • [12] Ruska Š., Porubän J., Defining Annotation Constraints in Attribute Oriented Programming, AEI, 10, 89–93, 2010 Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2012-11-04

Published in Print: 2012-10-01

Citation Information: Open Computer Science, Volume 2, Issue 3, Pages 283–299, ISSN (Online) 2299-1093, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s13537-012-0015-7.

Export Citation

© 2012 Versita Warsaw. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in