This paper describes the data abstraction mechanisms used in SODOS (Software Documentation Support), a computerized system which supports the definition and manipulation of documents used in developing software. Our purpose is to show the generic definition of a document, to define precisely the operations of consistency, completeness, and traceability, and finally to show how the generic document and associated operations are mapped onto the relational model. The SODOS system differs from others in that it is built on top of a database management system (DBMS) and an object-based model of the Software Life Cycle (SLC). One advantage of this model is that it supports software documentation independent of any fixed methodology that the developers may be using. Another advantage of the system is that it permits traceability through all phases of the Software Life Cycle, thus facilitating the testing and maintenance phases. In this paper we define the document representation in terms of a graph model mapped into a relational data model.

A description is given of a computerized environment, SODOS (Software Documentation Support), which supports the definition and manipulation of documents used in developing software. An object-oriented environment is used as a basis for the SODOS interface. SODOS is built around a software life-cycle model that structures all access to the documents stored in the environment. This model supports software documentation independently of any fixed methodology that the developers may be using. The main advantage of the system is that it permits traceability through each phase of the life cycle, thus facilitating the test and maintenance phases. The effort involved in learning and using SODOS is simplified by a sophisticated, user-friendly interface.

Abstract The concepts of process and guarded command have become the basic building blocks in concurrent programming language design. In this paper we deal with many of the proposed communication and synchronization primitives and we compare them from the perspective of their implementability. Our evaluation treats four basic criteria: the length of synchronization, process termination, deadlock and protocol complexity.