Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The 4+1 view model is generic and is not restricted to any notation, tool or design method. Quoting Kruchten, The “4+1” view model is rather “generic”: other notations and tools can be used, other design methods can be used, especially for the logical and process decompositions, but we have indicated the ones we have used with success.
Often, no single optimal solution for any given set of architecture design problems exists. Architectural decision making is a core responsibility of software architects; [5] additional motivation for/of the importance of architectural decisions as a first-class concept in software architecture can be found online. [6]
[1] [2] The trend towards agile methods in software engineering is noticeable, [3] however the need for improved studies on the subject is also paramount. [4] [5] Also note that some of the methods listed might be newer or older or still in use or out-dated, and the research on software design methods is not new and on-going. [6] [7] [8] [9]
Software architecture patterns operate at a higher level of abstraction than software design patterns, solving broader system-level challenges. While these patterns typically affect system-level concerns, the distinction between architectural patterns and architectural styles can sometimes be blurry. Examples include Circuit Breaker. [1] [2] [3]
One view of aspect-oriented software development is that every major feature of the program, core concern (business logic), or cross-cutting concern (additional features), is an aspect, and by weaving them together (a process also called composition), one finally produces a whole out of the separate aspects. This approach is known as pure ...
In software development, [1] it tends to be among the less iterative and flexible approaches, as progress flows in largely one direction (downwards like a waterfall) through the phases of conception, initiation, analysis, design, construction, testing, deployment, and maintenance. [2]
An early example of answer set programming was the planning method proposed in 1997 by Dimopoulos, Nebel and Köhler. [3] [4] Their approach is based on the relationship between plans and stable models. [5] In 1998 Soininen and Niemelä [6] applied what is now known as answer set programming to the problem of product configuration. [4]
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us