International Journal of System & Software Engineering

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Impact, Effect and Relationship Amongst the Collection of Coupling Measures


Affiliations
1 Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Chhatrapati Shivaji Institute of Technology, Durg, Chhattisgarh, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


Several authors have tried to address the problem of impact, effect, and relationship amongst the collection of coupling measures by introducing frameworks to characterise different approaches to coupling and the relative strengths of these, although, on their own, none of the frameworks could be considered comprehensive. There are three existing and quite different frameworks for object-oriented coupling. First, Eder et al. identify three different types of relationships. These relationships, interaction relationships between methods, component relationships between classes, and inheritance between classes, are then used to derive different dimensions of coupling which are classified according to different strengths. Second, Hitz and Montazeri approach coupling by deriving two different types of coupling: object level coupling and class level coupling which are determined by the state of an object and the state of an object's implementation respectively. Again different strengths of coupling are proposed. And third, Briand et al. (1997) constitute coupling as interactions between classes. The strength of the coupling is determined by the type of the interaction, the relationship between the classes, and the interaction's locus of impact. As none of the frameworks has been used to characterise existing measures to the different dimensions of coupling identified, the negative aspects highlighted above are still very common ones.

Keywords

Coupling, Inheritance Coupling, Level of Coupling and Framework.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Abreu, F., Goulao, M., & Esteves, R. (1995). Toward the design quality evaluation of object-oriented software systems. 5th International Conference on Software Quality, Austin, Texas, USA.

  • Arisholm, E. (2002). Dynamic coupling measures for object-oriented software. In Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Software Metrics 8, 33-42.

  • Arisholm, E., Briand, L. C., & Foyen, A. (2004). Dynamic coupling measurement for object-oriented software. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 30(8).

  • Basili, V., Briand, L., & Melo, W. (1995). Measuring the impact of reuse on quality and productivity in objectoriented systems. Technical Report, University of Maryland, Department of Computer Science, CSTR-3395.

  • Basili, V. R., Briand, L. C., & Melo, W. L. (1996). A validation of object-oriented design metrics as quality indicators. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 22(10), 751-761.

  • Briand, L. C., Daly, J. W., & Wust, J. (2002). A unified framework for coupling measurement in objectoriented systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 25(1), 91-121.

  • Briand, L., Devanbu, P., & Melo, W. (1997). An investigation into coupling measures for C++. Technical Report ISERN 96-08. IEEE ICSE ‘97, Boston, USA, (to be published).

  • Briand, L., Emam, K. E., & Morasca, S. (1995). Theoretical and empirical validation of software product measures. Technical Report, Centre de Recherche Informatique de Montréal.

  • Briand, L., Morasca, S., & Basili, V. (1993). Measuring and assessing maintainability at the end of high-level design. IEEE Conference on Software Maintenance, Montreal, Canada.

  • Briand, L., Morasca, S., & Basili, V. (1994). Defining and validating high-level design metrics. Technical Report, University of Maryland, CS-TR 3301.

  • Briand, L., Morasca, S., & Basili, V. (1996). Propertybased software engineering measurement. IEEE Transactions of Software Engineering, 22(1), 68-86.

  • Chidamber, S. R., & Kemerer, C. F. (1991). Towards a metrics suite for object oriented design. In A. Paepcke, (ed.) Proceedings of Conference on ObjectOriented Programming: Systems, Languages and Applications, 26(11), 197-211.

  • Chidamber, S. R., & Kemerer, C. F. (1994). A metrics suite for object oriented design. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 20(6), 476-493.

  • Churcher, N. I., & Shepperd, M. J. (1995). Comments on a metrics suite for object-oriented design. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 21(3), 263-265.

  • Harrison, R., Counsell, S., & Nithi, R. (2002). Dynamic metrics for object oriented designs. Proceedings of Software Metrics Symposium, 5, 150-157.

  • Poshyvanyk, D., & Marcus, A. (2006). The conceptual coupling metrics for object-oriented systems. Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance.

  • Yacoub, S. M., Ammar, H. H., & Robinson, T. (2002). Dynamic metrics for object oriented designs. Proceedings of Software Metrics Symposium, 6, 50-61.


Abstract Views: 207

PDF Views: 0




  • Impact, Effect and Relationship Amongst the Collection of Coupling Measures

Abstract Views: 207  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Anjali Verma
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Chhatrapati Shivaji Institute of Technology, Durg, Chhattisgarh, India
Bhupesh Kr. Dewangan
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Chhatrapati Shivaji Institute of Technology, Durg, Chhattisgarh, India

Abstract


Several authors have tried to address the problem of impact, effect, and relationship amongst the collection of coupling measures by introducing frameworks to characterise different approaches to coupling and the relative strengths of these, although, on their own, none of the frameworks could be considered comprehensive. There are three existing and quite different frameworks for object-oriented coupling. First, Eder et al. identify three different types of relationships. These relationships, interaction relationships between methods, component relationships between classes, and inheritance between classes, are then used to derive different dimensions of coupling which are classified according to different strengths. Second, Hitz and Montazeri approach coupling by deriving two different types of coupling: object level coupling and class level coupling which are determined by the state of an object and the state of an object's implementation respectively. Again different strengths of coupling are proposed. And third, Briand et al. (1997) constitute coupling as interactions between classes. The strength of the coupling is determined by the type of the interaction, the relationship between the classes, and the interaction's locus of impact. As none of the frameworks has been used to characterise existing measures to the different dimensions of coupling identified, the negative aspects highlighted above are still very common ones.

Keywords


Coupling, Inheritance Coupling, Level of Coupling and Framework.

References