Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.

Daniel J. Barrett

dblp:81/6735 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 1996
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 2 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers
Programming languages and type systems · 62% Requirements engineering and software design · 38%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Programming languages and type systems
interoperability
0.011996
Automated Support for Seamless Interoperability in Polylingual Software Systems · SIGSOFT FSE 1996
Requirements engineering and software design › software architecture
component-based software engineering
0.011996
A Framework for Event-Based Software Integration · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 1996
Requirements engineering and software design
software architecture
0.011996
Automated Support for Seamless Interoperability in Polylingual Software Systems · SIGSOFT FSE 1996

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

reference model · 0.0object-oriented modeling · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1996 Automated Support for Seamless Interoperability in Polylingual Software Systems
abstract
Interoperability is a fundamental concern in many areas of software engineering, such as software reuse or infrastructures for software development environments. Of particular interest to software engineers are the interoperability problems arising in polylingual software systems. The defining characteristic of polylingual systems is their focus on uniform interaction among a set of components written in two or more different languages.Existing approaches to support for interoperability are inadequate because they lack seamlessness: that is, they generally force software developers to compensate explicitly for the existence of multiple languages or the crossing of language boundaries. In this paper we first discuss some foundations for polylingual interoperability, then review and assess existing approaches. We then outline PolySPIN, an approach in which interoperability can be made transparent and existing systems can be made to interoperate with no visible modifications. We also describe PolySPINner, our prototype implementation of a toolset providing automated support for PolySPIN. We illustrate the advantages of our approach by applying it to an example problem and comparing PolySPIN's ease of use with that of an alternative, CORBA-style approach.
Daniel J. Barrett, Alan Kaplan, Jack C. Wileden
SIGSOFT FSE1
1996 A Framework for Event-Based Software Integration
abstract
Although event-based software integration is one of the most prevalent approaches to loose integration, no consistent model for describing it exists. As a result, there is no uniform way to discuss event-based integration, compare approaches and implementations, specify new event-based approaches, or match user requirements with the capabilities of event-based integration systems. We attempt to address these shortcomings by specifying a generic framework for event-based integration , the EBI framework, that provides a flexible, object-oriented model for discussing and comparing event-based integration approaches. The EBI framework can model dynamic and static specification, composition, and decomposition and can be instantiated to describe the features of most common event-based integration approaches. We demonstrate how to use the framework as a reference model by comparing and contrasting three well-known integration systems: FIELD, Polylith, and CORBA.
Daniel J. Barrett, Lori A. Clarke, Peri L. Tarr, Alexander E. Wise
ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol.1