Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Component‐Based Systems
View through CrossRef
AbstractHuman‐engineered physical devices such as cars and appliances and computers, as well as naturally occurring physical objects such as forests and galaxies and nerve bundles, are often called “systems.” Both this word and the thinking that underlies it are crucial features of modern software engineering as well. Software systems, however, are purely symbolic entities that have meaning and intellectual interest even without a physical manifestation. Component‐based systems in physical engineering and in software engineering therefore have many common features, yet differ in important and sometimes subtle ways.The characteristics of component‐based software engineering as currently practiced can be approached from two different perspectives. One explanation is based on the relationship to fundamental principles of system design. In this view, the key features of component‐based software engineering could have developed simply as inevitable consequences of applying general “system thinking” to software systems. Another explanation is based on observing the history of two related branches of software engineering research. In this view, the key features of component‐based software engineering actually have resulted from a melding of the concurrent but curiously separate activities of two communities: advances in software reuse research and common off‐the‐shelf (COTS) component technology, and advances in object‐oriented (OO) technology.This article begins by exploring the fundamental similarities and differences between component‐based systems in the physical world and those in the software world. It then uses that analysis and a summary of component‐based software research as a basis for understanding the currently unfolding transition from second‐generation to third‐generation OO technology: the integration of component‐based software concepts into modern software practice, which relies on the identification and use of “objects”.
Title: Component‐Based Systems
Description:
AbstractHuman‐engineered physical devices such as cars and appliances and computers, as well as naturally occurring physical objects such as forests and galaxies and nerve bundles, are often called “systems.
” Both this word and the thinking that underlies it are crucial features of modern software engineering as well.
Software systems, however, are purely symbolic entities that have meaning and intellectual interest even without a physical manifestation.
Component‐based systems in physical engineering and in software engineering therefore have many common features, yet differ in important and sometimes subtle ways.
The characteristics of component‐based software engineering as currently practiced can be approached from two different perspectives.
One explanation is based on the relationship to fundamental principles of system design.
In this view, the key features of component‐based software engineering could have developed simply as inevitable consequences of applying general “system thinking” to software systems.
Another explanation is based on observing the history of two related branches of software engineering research.
In this view, the key features of component‐based software engineering actually have resulted from a melding of the concurrent but curiously separate activities of two communities: advances in software reuse research and common off‐the‐shelf (COTS) component technology, and advances in object‐oriented (OO) technology.
This article begins by exploring the fundamental similarities and differences between component‐based systems in the physical world and those in the software world.
It then uses that analysis and a summary of component‐based software research as a basis for understanding the currently unfolding transition from second‐generation to third‐generation OO technology: the integration of component‐based software concepts into modern software practice, which relies on the identification and use of “objects”.
Related Results
Three components of the calcium current in cultured glomerulosa cells from rat adrenal gland.
Three components of the calcium current in cultured glomerulosa cells from rat adrenal gland.
1. Ca2+ channels were studied in cultured glomerulosa cells from the rat adrenal gland. The whole‐cell configuration of the patch‐clamp technique was used. Cs+‐filled pipettes were...
Relations on Fs-sets and Some Results
Relations on Fs-sets and Some Results
In this paper, we define an Fs-binary relation on a pair of Fs-sets and also define a partial order on the collection of all Fs-binary relations between the given pair of Fs-sets a...
Frequency of Common Chromosomal Abnormalities in Patients with Idiopathic Acquired Aplastic Anemia
Frequency of Common Chromosomal Abnormalities in Patients with Idiopathic Acquired Aplastic Anemia
Objective: To determine the frequency of common chromosomal aberrations in local population idiopathic determine the frequency of common chromosomal aberrations in local population...
[RETRACTED] Keanu Reeves CBD Gummies v1
[RETRACTED] Keanu Reeves CBD Gummies v1
[RETRACTED]Keanu Reeves CBD Gummies ==❱❱ Huge Discounts:[HURRY UP ] Absolute Keanu Reeves CBD Gummies (Available)Order Online Only!! ❰❰= https://www.facebook.com/Keanu-Reeves-CBD-G...
SEISMIC RESPONSE OF POWER TRANSMISSION TOWER-LINE SYSTEM UNDER MULTI-COMPONENT MULTI-SUPPORT EXCITATIONS
SEISMIC RESPONSE OF POWER TRANSMISSION TOWER-LINE SYSTEM UNDER MULTI-COMPONENT MULTI-SUPPORT EXCITATIONS
The effect of multi-component multi-support excitations on the response of power transmission tower-line system is analyzed in this paper, using three-dimensional finite element ti...
What Do You Want on Your Tombstone?
What Do You Want on Your Tombstone?
ABSTRACT
Tombstoning, draw-bridging, bill-boarding, and skewing are all common defects that are caused by movement of components out of their intended position. T...
Qualitative Data Requirements in the Divayana Evaluation Model
Qualitative Data Requirements in the Divayana Evaluation Model
The need for qualitative data to support the evaluation process using the DIVAYANA (Description-Input-Verification-Action-Yack-Analysis-Nominate-Actualization) evaluation model is ...
The influence of intensity and neuropathic component of pain syndrome on the quality of life in patients with multiple sclerosis
The influence of intensity and neuropathic component of pain syndrome on the quality of life in patients with multiple sclerosis
The aim of the work. To analyze the influence of intensity and neuropathic component of pain syndrome on the quality of life structure characteristics in patients with multiple scl...

