Read the abstract, see who wrote it and who cites it, and get the citation in APA, MLA, Chicago or Harvard.
About 10,000 papers for “software engineering tools”
Pranshu Gupta, Ramón A. Mata-Toledo · AccessScience · 2017
AccessScience is an authoritative and dynamic online resource that contains incisively written, high-quality educational material covering all major scientific disciplines. An acclaimed gateway to scientific knowledge, AccessScience is continually expanding the ways it can demonstrate and explain core, trustworthy scientific information that inspires and guides users to deeper knowledge.
Cited by 0Open access
R. Żelazny · Lecture notes in physics · 2008
Cited by 0
Larry L. Wear, James R. Pinkert · Microprocessing and Microprogramming · 1986
Cited by 0Open access
John E. Gaffney · 2005
Cited by 1
2016
Cited by 0
2016
Cited by 1
Real-Time Systems · 1992
Cited by 0
Hussan Munir, Per Runeson, Krzysztof Wnuk · KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) · 2019
Context: Open tools (e.g., Jenkins, Gerrit and Git) offer a lucrative alternative to commercial tools. Many companies and developers from OSS communities make a collaborative effort to improve the tools. Prior to this study, we developed an empirically based theory for companies' strategic choices on the development of these tools, based on empirical observations in the telecom domain. Aim: The aim of this study is to validate the theory of openness for tools in software engineering, in another domain, automotive. Specifically, we validated the theory propositions and mapped the case companies onto the model of openness. Method: We run focus groups in two automotive companies, collecting data in a survey and follow-up discussions. We used the repertory grid technique to analyze the survey responses, in combination with qualitative data from the focus group, to validate the propositions. Results: Openness of tools has the potential to reduce development costs and time, and may lead to process and product innovation. This study confirms three out of five theory propositions, on cost and time reduction, and the complementary role of open tools. One propositions was not possible to validate due to lack of investment in OSS tools communities by both companies. However, our findings extend the fifth proposition to require management being involved for both the proactive and reactive strategy. Further, we observe that the move towards open tools happen with a paradigm shift towards openness in the automotive domain, and lead to standardization of tools. Both companies confirm that they need legal procedures for the contribution, as well as an internal champion, driving the open tools strategy. Conclusion: We validated the theory, originating from the telecom domain, partially using two automotive companies. Both case companies are classified as laggards (reactive, cost saving) in the model of openness presented in the theory. Furthermore, we would like to have more validations studies to validate the remaining quadrants (e.g., leverage, lucrativeness and leaders).
Cited by 3Open access
Zhiming Liu, R. Venkatesh · 2005
Abstract. We propose a collaboration project to integrate the research effort and results obtained at UNU-IIST on formal techniques in component and object systems with research at TRDDC in modelling and development of tools that support object-oriented and component-based design. The main theme is an integration of verification techniques with engineering methods of modelling and design, and an integration of verification tools and transformation tools. This will result in a method in which a correct program can be developed through transformations that are either proven to be correct or by showing that the transformed model can be proven correct by a verification tool. Transformations include those for model construction and those that invoke verification tools. 1 Formal Software Engineering and the Grand Challenge The goal of the Verifying Compiler Grand Challenge [14] is to build a verifying compiler that “uses mathematical and logical reasoning to check the programs that it compiles.” This implies that “a program should be allowed to run only if it is both syntactically and
Cited by 3
Roadmap William Harrison, William Harrison, Harold Ossher et al. · 2000
Tools and environments to aid developers in producing software have existed, in one form or another, since the early days of computer programming. They are becoming increasingly crucial as the demand for software increases, time-to-market decreases, and diversity and complexity grow beyond anything imagined a few decades ago. In this paper, we briefly review some of the history of tools and environments in software engineering, and then discuss some key challenges that we believe the field faces over the next decade.
Cited by 0
William Harrison, Harold Ossher, Peri Tarr · 2000
The development of methodologies, formalisms, and tool and environment support for separation, extraction and integration of concerns. Linguistic and tool support for morphogenic software: software that is malleable for life, sufficiently adaptable to allow context mismatch to be overcome with acceptable effort, repeatedly, as new, unanticipated contexts arise. The development of new methodologies, formalisms, and processes to address non-traditional software lifecycles, and the tool and environment support to facilitate them. The development of new methodologies, formalisms, processes and tool and environment support to address the engineering of software in new, challenging domains, such as pervasive computing and e-commerce. The adoption or adaptation of XML, Enterprise Java Beans and sophisticated message brokering for integration of both tools and commercial applications. Bill Harrison has been with IBM in its system development divisions since 1966 and was one of the initial designers of the [then] OS/360 Time-Sharing Option (TSO). Since 1970, he has been associated with the IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Laboratory.
Cited by 0
J. Fernando Naveda, Stephen B. Seidman · 2007
This chapter contains sections titled: Management tools and methods Development tools and methods Maintenance tools and methods Support tools and methods
Cited by 0
Charles Rich, Richard C. Waters · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · 1992
Most software engineering tools use a shallow representation of software objects and manipulate this representation using procedural methods. This approach allows one to get off to a fast start and quickly provides a tool that delivers benefits. However, a point will be reached where more knowledge-intensive approaches will be needed to achieve significantly higher levels of capability. The authors suggest that the software engineering tools of the future will have to rely on: deep representation to capture a sufficiently large part of knowledge about programming in general and particular programs; inspection methods to deal with complexity; and intelligent assistance.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>
Cited by 15
Stephen Hague, Brian Ford · Lecture notes in computer science · 1982
Cited by 1
Lawrence M. Wilcox · NASA Technical Reports Server (NASA) · 1993
Over the years many engineering disciplines have developed, including chemical, electronic, etc. Common to all engineering disciplines is the use of rigor, models, metrics, and predefined methodologies. Recently, a new engineering discipline has appeared on the scene, called software engineering. For over thirty years computer software has been developed and the track record has not been good. Software development projects often miss schedules, are over budget, do not give the user what is wanted, and produce defects. One estimate is there are one to three defects per 1000 lines of deployed code. More and more systems are requiring larger and more complex software for support. As this requirement grows, the software development problems grow exponentially. It is believed that software quality can be improved by applying engineering principles. Another compelling reason to bring the engineering disciplines to software development is productivity. It has been estimated that productivity of producing software has only increased one to two percent a year in the last thirty years. Ironically, the computer and its software have contributed significantly to the industry-wide productivity, but computer professionals have done a poor job of using the computer to do their job. Engineering disciplines and methodologies are now emerging supported by software tools that address the problems of software development. This paper addresses some of the current software engineering methodologies as a backdrop for the general evaluation of computer assisted software engineering (CASE) tools from actual installation of and experimentation with some specific tools.
Cited by 0Open access
Robert A. Brownlie, Philip Brown, Kathleen Culver-Lozo et al. · Bell Labs Technical Journal · 2002
Lucent Technologies serves a large variety of telecommunications markets and customer needs. Success in such a rapidly changing environment requires that we quickly and effectively identify market needs and marshal our resources to address them. Clearly, a company that better coordinates and focuses its resources to serve customer needs will enjoy a competitive advantage. Because software development processes provide an important mechanism to coordinate project teams and ensure the customer-perceived value of the delivered product, we must be able to develop, deploy, and evolve those processes rapidly in step with the changing environment. Our experiences with software process engineering initiatives for Lucent projects have shown that such rapid process iteration is possible if an organization has a solid process engineering infrastructure. To provide such an infrastructure, the Software Technology Center has developed a set of process engineering tools to support the rapid development, deployment, and improvement of software processes. The platform is based on a centralized database organized around a relational model of key process concepts. Process engineers create instances of this database and automatically generate different views of their process. The process views are deployed to the members of the project through the Internet and the World Wide Web.
Cited by 1
Dorota Huizinga, Adam Kolawa · 2007
Cited by 0Open access
Prabhjot Singh Anand, Deepak Chahal, Latika Kharb · International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development · 2018
Every day we use tools to help us achieve tasks; the use of a good tool in general will make a job much easier. When it comes to working with a computer, the tools we use are pieces of software which allow us to do our work. Without a text editor, it would be impossible to write a paper using a computer. In both the digital and real world, there are many options for tools for any job, and choosing the right tool can mean the difference between huge success and utter failure. For a software engineering project, t decision of what tools to use can make a large difference towards the cost and effectiveness of the project. Consider using a notepad text editor to write code for a project with tens of thousands of lines of code, it would be impractical at best. This paper is designed to identify the major tools used in a reengineering project, and identify what choices are available for each of those pieces of software.
Cited by 0Open access
Carrington, David · Queensland's institutional digital repository (The University of Queensland) · 2001
Cited by 0
Graham M. Megson · 1994
Cited by 0