Standard

Feature-Oriented Programming and Context-Oriented Programming: Comparing Paradigm Characteristics by Example Implementations. / Cardozo, Nicolas; Günther, Sebastian; D'Hondt, Theo; Mens, Kim.

Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Software Engineering Advances. IARIA, 2011. p. 130-135.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference paper

Harvard

Cardozo, N, Günther, S, D'Hondt, T & Mens, K 2011, Feature-Oriented Programming and Context-Oriented Programming: Comparing Paradigm Characteristics by Example Implementations. in Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Software Engineering Advances. IARIA, pp. 130-135, Unknown, 24/10/11.

APA

Cardozo, N., Günther, S., D'Hondt, T., & Mens, K. (2011). Feature-Oriented Programming and Context-Oriented Programming: Comparing Paradigm Characteristics by Example Implementations. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Software Engineering Advances (pp. 130-135). IARIA.

Vancouver

Cardozo N, Günther S, D'Hondt T, Mens K. Feature-Oriented Programming and Context-Oriented Programming: Comparing Paradigm Characteristics by Example Implementations. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Software Engineering Advances. IARIA. 2011. p. 130-135

Author

Cardozo, Nicolas ; Günther, Sebastian ; D'Hondt, Theo ; Mens, Kim. / Feature-Oriented Programming and Context-Oriented Programming: Comparing Paradigm Characteristics by Example Implementations. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Software Engineering Advances. IARIA, 2011. pp. 130-135

BibTeX

@inproceedings{edbdb8d3f32c4dc5a822f28d51fe1109,
title = "Feature-Oriented Programming and Context-Oriented Programming: Comparing Paradigm Characteristics by Example Implementations",
abstract = "Software variability can be supported by providing adaptations on top of a program's core behavior. For defining and composing adaptations in a program, different paradigms have been proposed. Two of them are feature-oriented programming and context-oriented programming. This paper compares an exemplar implementation of each paradigm. For the comparison, a common case study is used in which we detail how adaptations are defined, expressed, and composed in each paradigm. Based on the case study, we uncover similarities and differences of each implementation, and derive a set of characteristics that identify each of them. The experiment shows several overlapping similarities between the two implementations, which is an indicator that there is a similar core set of characteristics for each paradigm. This finding brings the two seemingly disjoint research directions together, and can stimulate future research both in the direction of merging features and context as well as to improve the characteristic strengths of each paradigm.",
keywords = "Feature-oriented programming, Context-oriented programming, Language paradigms",
author = "Nicolas Cardozo and Sebastian G{\"u}nther and Theo D'Hondt and Kim Mens",
note = "ICSEA'11",
year = "2011",
month = "10",
day = "24",
language = "English",
isbn = "978-1-61208-165-6",
pages = "130--135",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Software Engineering Advances",
publisher = "IARIA",

}

RIS

TY - GEN

T1 - Feature-Oriented Programming and Context-Oriented Programming: Comparing Paradigm Characteristics by Example Implementations

AU - Cardozo, Nicolas

AU - Günther, Sebastian

AU - D'Hondt, Theo

AU - Mens, Kim

N1 - ICSEA'11

PY - 2011/10/24

Y1 - 2011/10/24

N2 - Software variability can be supported by providing adaptations on top of a program's core behavior. For defining and composing adaptations in a program, different paradigms have been proposed. Two of them are feature-oriented programming and context-oriented programming. This paper compares an exemplar implementation of each paradigm. For the comparison, a common case study is used in which we detail how adaptations are defined, expressed, and composed in each paradigm. Based on the case study, we uncover similarities and differences of each implementation, and derive a set of characteristics that identify each of them. The experiment shows several overlapping similarities between the two implementations, which is an indicator that there is a similar core set of characteristics for each paradigm. This finding brings the two seemingly disjoint research directions together, and can stimulate future research both in the direction of merging features and context as well as to improve the characteristic strengths of each paradigm.

AB - Software variability can be supported by providing adaptations on top of a program's core behavior. For defining and composing adaptations in a program, different paradigms have been proposed. Two of them are feature-oriented programming and context-oriented programming. This paper compares an exemplar implementation of each paradigm. For the comparison, a common case study is used in which we detail how adaptations are defined, expressed, and composed in each paradigm. Based on the case study, we uncover similarities and differences of each implementation, and derive a set of characteristics that identify each of them. The experiment shows several overlapping similarities between the two implementations, which is an indicator that there is a similar core set of characteristics for each paradigm. This finding brings the two seemingly disjoint research directions together, and can stimulate future research both in the direction of merging features and context as well as to improve the characteristic strengths of each paradigm.

KW - Feature-oriented programming

KW - Context-oriented programming

KW - Language paradigms

M3 - Conference paper

SN - 978-1-61208-165-6

SP - 130

EP - 135

BT - Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Software Engineering Advances

PB - IARIA

ER -

ID: 2104456