Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Mateen Ahmed Abbasi Dur –e-Benish Batool Rahil Butt Tanveer Mehmood
UIIT-PMAS UIIT-PMAS UIIT-PMAS Anjum
Rawalpindi, Pakistan Rawalpindi, Pakistan Rawalpindi, Pakistan UIIT-PMAS
mateenabbasi@msn.com benimalik@rocketmail.com rahilbutt82@hotmail.com tanveer2382@gmail.com
200
specifying innovative connector types that can Language Quality Definition:
characterize complex interaction protocols. [8][10] Due to uncertainty in Software architecture
[12] Documentation SAD provide low support to
Semantics: consistent architecture and provide intermediate
The semantics of Architecture Analysis and design support in the completeness of architecture
language are described in natural language because it specification. Sometimes SAD uses mutually graphic
is not formerly developed with the specific semantic. and natural language that’s why here be dilemma of
But many attempts were made in this sense uncertainty. And in a few cases it only utilize natural
afterward. [8] [10] language or graphic (UML). [14][15]
Dynamic Architecture support: Behavior specification:
Architecture Analysis and design language doesn’t Software behavior Document (SBD) describes the
fully support the dynamic architecture but at performance of software by setting and requirements.
someplace it supports dynamic architecture and [15] In Software Architecture Documentation Unified
variability. [8][10][12] Modeling Language 2.0 covers behavioral as well as
Language Quality Definition: structural characteristics of software system. [17]
AADL not utterly sustain the language class
characterization because ADL is not developed with III. OBSERVATIONS
accurate semantics. Natural language is used in In table 1.0 comparison of ADLs (Wright, Unicon,
AADL that’s why to complete the architecture AADL) and SAD are given on different parameters.
specifications AADL make available intermediate Following are the meanings of the symbols used in
support and a little hold to the stability of architecture table 1.0:
requirement. [10]
Behavior specification: Hs: High capability: language gives
To perform behavior specification in AADL comprehensive and unambiguous support
behaviors seize is attached to module specification.
Ms: Medium: capability may be achieved in a
[13]
roundabout way. Language offers standard
d) Software Architecture Documentation (SAD)
features
Similar to Architecture Description Language,
Ls: Low: modest support granted
Software Architecture Documentation illustrate
Ns: No Support
element interfaces, Test scenarios, Subsystems
limitation, third-party module buying choices, Table 1.0: RESULT
exterior services, Behavioral specification, Team Attributes Unicon SAD Wright AADL
structure and schedule dependencies. [12] Software Consistency of Ls Ms Hs Ls
Architecture Documentation consisted on natural architecture
languages and Unified Modeling Language diagrams Specification
and SAD must encompass element relation properties Completeness Ms Ms Hs Ms
rules. [14] of architecture
Component and Connector support: Specifications
A few of UML 2.0 notations are used by Software
Behavior Ns Hs Hs Hs
Architecture Documentation because UML supports
Specifications
mutually model based and object oriented perception.
Textual Hs Hs Hs Hs
UML 2.0 improved support towards the modeling
High level Hs Hs Ls Ns
architectural problems of the software system.
Component
Among the most important features add up enriched
interfaces, ports, superior components and Connector Ns Ls Hs Ns
connectors.[14][15] Support
Semantics: Formally Ns Ms Hs Ns
The theory Software architecture Documentation is defined
based on well defined prescribed rules and Semantics
regulations and can be processed and checked by Formally Ns Ls Hs Hs
machine because SAD uses Unified Modeling Analyzable
Language. 14] [15] Graphical Hs Hs Ns Hs
Dynamic Architecture support: Dynamic Ns Hs Ns Ms
Software architecture Documentation entirely holds Architecture
up to grip dynamic architecture as there are a number Support
of tools available for Unified Modeling Language.
UML have different diagrams like, Object diagram,
Use case diagram, activity diagram etc. [16]
201
IV. DISCUSSION Model based and object oriented concepts as
Software architecture documentation mostly uses
From the reviews presented in earlier section we can
unified modeling language in architecture
assume that there is increasing attention in
description, with the help of SAD the limitations of
Architecture Description Languages as they offer
Architecture Description Languages can be
precise support in the development of software
overcome. In The Table No 2.0 we describe some
architecture. Architecture Description languages are
strengths and weakness of the ADLs and SAD. Most
mainly popular in safety critical applications such as
of the properties of SAD is because of Unified
process control, infrastructure, medicine, spaceflight
Modeling Language (SAD use some of its diagrams )
and various others. Almost every hardware or
software architecture gets benefit from the rigidity
Table 2.0. Strengths and Weakness of ADLs and
brought by Architecture Description languages.
SAD
ADLs has some limitation as well as advantages,
Software architecture documentation sustain equally
Strengths Weakness
• ADLs signify software architecture in a
clear and error free manner.
• ADLs hold recitation of system at advanced
stage of notion.
• As the mainstream of ADLs is textual as a
result machine understandable and
appropriate for automation.
• Due to proper representation of ADLs they
permit analysis of architecture’s exactness,
completeness, vagueness and performance.
• ADLs sustain automatic production of
systems which run hardware and • Most of ADLs are domain depended like avionics etc and
application programs.[8] are only fit for that type of domains.
• They present graphical language rules and a • Mostly ADLs are text based and are less attractive for
ADLs textual form also. other domain’s software architects [16] [17] [8].
• Properly described logics and rules. • The main weakness of ADLs is that they be short of
• The help for manufacturing and verification sustaining tools with the exception of few .[8][18]
is available by Every ADL.
• The modification of architecture is done by
ADLs.
• ADL is handy and user friendly.
• ADLs overpass the space among research
and the real world, provide the
requirements of practitioner.
• Similarly to Unified Modeling Language
ADL provide multiple visions.
• Only reliable real work no visualizing.
• ADLs are mutually extendable in tools and
language support [17] [18] [19].
202
In year 2013 a research study was performed in analyzable, practicable, consistent and absolute .
which forty-eight practitioners from forty different However in real time application systems and in
information technology organizations of fifteen small scale applications architecture as compare to
countries take part to study that what requirements other Architecture Description Languages, Software
industry need from Architecture languages. architecture Documentation is much consistent, since
The value of ADLs features in precedent and SAD uses unified modeling language and due to its
upcoming projects was studied. Worth of ADLs properties and many professionals are moving
features in precedent projects are : towards Unified Modeling Language. UML is cost-
i. Support for iterative architecting, effective and simply understandable. This research
ii. Versioning, provides information to three communities, 1st is
iii. Well-defined semantics, architect who decide an Architecture Description
iv. Support for multiple architectural views Language, 2nd is technology sponsor who fund for
v. Tool support , development of architecture language and the 3rd is
vi. Analysis , language creator. This research is an effort to to
vii. Graphical syntax. increase the motivation towards software
documentation language. The scope of this paper was
In Table 3.0 we provide the summary of our research limited. In future work additional effort could have
work, we evaluated ADL and SAD on the extent of been expended in identifying a more parameters of
little, average and high on four factors which we ADLs and SAD.
studied.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
Table 3.0 This research has been conducted with the partial
Factors/ ADLs SAD support from i-Lab Australia
Language Quality High High
Definition References
Behavior High average [1] Shaw, DeLine, Klein, Ross, Young, Zelesnik
specification “Abstractions for Software Architectures and Tools
Semantic average little to Support Them”. 1994
Dynamic average High
Architecture support [2] N. Medvidovic, P. Oreizy, J. E. Robbins and R.
Component and average average N. Taylor.( 1996) Using object-oriented typing
Connector support to support architectural design in the C2 style.
[3] M. Moriconi, X. Qian and R.
Riemenschneider.(1995) Correct architecture
refinement. IEEE Transactions on Software
V. CONCLUSION
Engineering, Special Issue on Software
Ever since the early on nineteen’s a number of Architecture
ADLs) have been projected that allows the developer [4] P. Binns and S. Vestal. (1993) Formal real-time
to specifically design their system architectures in a architecturespecification and analysis.
proper, specific and presentable way. Architecture [5] L. Coglianese and R. szymanski,(1993) DSSA-
description languages are normally recognized with ADAGE:An Environment for Architecture–
their ample support for the system architecture based Avionics development.In Proceedings of
specification and their premature prescribed analysis. AGARD’93, May 1993.
Still, regardless of the strength provided by [6] D. C. Luckham, et all.1995 Specifications and
architecture description languages. These languages analysis of system architecture using Rapide.
still have not come into the mainstream. In this [7] R. K. Pandey2010. Architecture Description
research work we acquired two early prominent Languages (ADLs) vs. UML: A Review
Architecture Description Languages, one recently [8] Mert Ozkaya and Christos Kloukinas. (2013)
and mostly utilized language and also acquired “Are We There Yet? Analyzing Architecture
Software architecture Documentation But the Description Languages for Formal Analysis,
professionals are still not capable to develop an Usability, and Realizability”.
Architecture Description language which make
possible the specification of multifarious systems in a [9] Paul C. Clements.1996. “A Survey of
method that allows premature formal analysis and at Architecture Description Languages”.
the similar moment promises that e architecture is
203
[10] George A. Papadopoulos .2008. “Evaluating the
Use of ADLs in Component-Based
Development”.
204