ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Handling the subclassing anomaly with Object Teams
Full text PdfPdf (850 KB)
Source ACM SIGPLAN Notices archive
Volume 40 ,  Issue 8  (August 2005) table of contents
SESSION: Technical correspondence table of contents
Pages: 12 - 18  
Year of Publication: 2005
ISSN:0362-1340
Authors
Jeff Furlong  Chapman University, Orange, CA
Atanas Radenski  Chapman University, Orange, CA
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 0,   Downloads (12 Months): 10,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
Save this Article to a Binder    Display Formats: BibTex  EndNote ACM Ref   
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1089851.1089855
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Existing Java software or libraries can evolve via subclassing. Unfortunately, subclassing may not properly support code adaptation when there are dependencies between classes. More precisely, subclassing in collections of related classes may require reimplementation of otherwise valid classes. This problem is defined as the subclassing anomaly, which is an issue when software evolution or code reuse is a goal of the programmer who is using existing classes. Object Teams offers an implicit fix to this problem and is largely compatible with the existing JVM's. In this paper, we evaluate how well Object Teams succeeds in providing a solution for a complex, real world project. Our results indicate that while Object Teams is a suitable solution for simple examples, it does not meet the requirements for large scale projects. The reasons why Object Teams fails in certain usages may prove useful to those who create linguistic modifications in languages or those who seek new methods for code adaptation.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
 
2
Herrmann, S., 2004. Confinement and Representation Encapsulation in Object Teams. Technical Report June 2004, Technical University Berlin. Available from <http://www.objectteams.org/publications/TR2004-06.pdf>.
 
3
Jikes Homepage. <http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/jikes/>.
 
4
Joy, B., et al. 2000. Java Language Specification, Addison-Wesley Pub Co, New York, New York.
 
5
Laffra, C., 2003. Java Bytecode Manipulation with JikesBT.
6
 
7
Object Teams Language Definition. <http://www.objectteams.org/def/index.html>.
 
8
Palsberg J., and Jay, C. B., 1997. The essence of the visitor pattern. Technical Report 05, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
 
9
 
10
Radenski, A., 2003. The Subclassing Anomaly in Compiler Evolution. International Journal on Information Theories and Applications, Institute of Information Theories and Applications, Sofia, Vol. 10, No 4, 2003, 394--399.
 
11
Tatsubori, M., 1999. An Extension Mechanism for the Java Language. Master's dissertation, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba City, Japan. Available from <http://www.csg.is.titech.ac.jp/openjava/papers/mich_thesis99.pdf>.
 
12
Watt, D. and Brown, D., 2000. Programming Language Processors in Java: Compilers and Interpreters, Prentice Hall, New York, New York.
 
13
Zenger, M., 2002. Evolving software with extensible modules. In: International Workshop on Unanticipated Software Evolution, Málaga, Spain. Available from <http://zenger.gmxhome.de/papers/use02.pdf>.

Collaborative Colleagues:
Jeff Furlong: colleagues
Atanas Radenski: colleagues