Software development system with an executable working model in an interpretable intermediate modeling language

• US 6,212,672 B1
• Filed: 03/07/1997
• Issued: 04/03/2001
• Est. Priority Date: 03/07/1997
• Status: Expired due to Fees

• Current Assignee: Dynamics Research Corporation (Science Applications International Corporation)
• Original Assignee: Dynamics Research Corporation (Science Applications International Corporation)
• Inventors: Holt, James, Hughes, David, Gorzela, Richard, Strom, Daniel, Keller, Steven
• Primary Examiner(s): Powell, Mark R.
• Assistant Examiner(s): INGBERG, TODD D
• Application Number:
  US08/813,487
• Time in Patent Office: 1,488 Days
• Field of Search: 395/701, 395/702, 395/703, 395/704, 395/705, 395/706, 395/707, 395/708, 395/712, 717/1, 717/2
• US Class Current: 717/104
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 30/20 Design optimisation, verification or simulation optimisation, verification or simulation of circuit designs G06F30/30
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 8/35 model driven

Abstract

A software development tool utilizes an intermediate object modeling language. The structure of the desired program is first described graphically by generating rule diagrams, state diagrams, and object diagrams such as user interface diagrams, event diagrams and other object diagrams. The development tool employs the diagrams to generate a working model of the program expressed in the object modeling language. The working model of the program can be executed without lengthy compiling, and hence program behavior can be quickly observed and tested. Further, the behavior of the working model can be quickly and easily changed by modifying the diagrams until the desired result is achieved. Source code is then generated from the object modeling language and compiled to create the final program.

Claims

1. A method for generating a software program in a predetermined language including the steps of:

graphically describing functionality for the program by generating at least one descriptive diagram, said at least one descriptive diagram including a rule diagram, said rule diagram including at least one rule, said rule including an object, a cause, and an effect, wherein said cause includes at least one condition, wherein said effect represents forming an instance of said object, wherein said effect further includes at least one expression, and wherein said at least one expression assigns a value to an attribute of said instance of said object;

employing the at least one descriptive diagram to generate an executable working model of the program by expressing the at least one descriptive diagram in an interpretable intermediate modeling language, wherein said working model is operable to evaluate said at least one expression to assign said value to said attribute of said instance of said object in the event that said condition is met, wherein said working model includes a plurality of special predicates containing type information regarding said object and said instance of said object, and wherein said working model is further operable to execute without checking said type information; and

generating source code in the predetermined language from the working model, wherein said generated source code reflects said type information contained in said special predicates within said working model.

2. The method of claim 1 including the further step of automatically generating representative expressions in the intermediate modeling language in response to additive changes in the at least one descriptive diagram.

3. The method of claim 2 including the further step of automatically deleting intermediate modeling language expressions corresponding to deleted portions in the at least one descriptive diagram.

4. The method of claim 1 including the further step of generating object diagrams in which objects are linked by associations, the object diagrams defining relationships between objects.

5. The method of claim 4 including the further step of specifying type relations between objects only for generation of the source code in the predetermined language.

6. The method of claim 4 including the further step of establishing inheritance between objects based on the associations that link objects.

7. The method of claim 4 including the further step of generating at least one state diagram defining a plurality of states associated with at least one object in the object diagram and state sequences caused by inputted events, the states being interconnected by transitions.

8. The method of claim 7 including the further step of generating at least one event object diagram in which events that affect transitions in the state diagram are defined.

9. The method of claim 8 including the further step of generating at least one rule diagram for defining activity within the program, the at least one rule diagram comprising rules and being employed to extend object diagrams and state diagrams such that the program operates in the desired manner.

10. The method of claim 9 including defining at least one cause and at least one effect for each rule in the rule diagram.

11. The method of claim 10 including distinctive types of causes, each type associated with a respective distinct execution priority.

12. The method of claim 10 wherein the at least one cause is comprised of a set of cause alternatives, each cause alternative being associated with an association in at least one object diagram.

13. The method of claim 12 wherein each effect is a set of actions triggered by execution of a cause alternative.

14. The method of claim 13 including the further step of applying each rule action in sequential order at execution.

15. The method of claim 14 including the further step of considering a cause alternative successful if the corresponding effect succeeds to execute.

16. The method of claim 15 including the further step of binding the rule applicable to a given object at runtime, the applicable rule being the innermost rule in the hierarchy.

17. The method of claim 16 including the further step of associating each alternative in a cause with an effect, and binding each effect to one object.

18. The method of claim 17 including the further step of sequentially attempting execution of each associated rule action when an effect is executed.

19. The method of claim 18 including the further step of considering the cause that called an effect completed if all of the associated rule actions are completed.

20. The method of claim 19 including the further step of, when a rule action is not successful, terminating execution of the corresponding effect and attempting the next sequential alternative.

21. The method or claim 20 including the further step of performing the alternative sequentially and, if any of the alternative in the cause completes successfully, considering the associated rule completed.

22. The method of claim 21 including the further step of performing the rule actions sequentially.

23. The method of claim 22 including the further step of, when a cause is not successful, searching for a cause with a matching name bound to the superclass of the original object and executing the associated alternatives.

24. The method of claim 23 including the further step of creating a planned association when such association is established by a rule action.

25. The method of claim 10 including the further step of providing an iterator function that performs a cause on each object involved in a particular association.

26. The method of claim 9 including the further step of representing associations in the object modeling language as logical relationships that can be traversed in any direction.

27. The method of claim 9 including the further step of model in generalization and aggregation by associations.

28. The method of claim 9 including the further step of performing actions associated with the meaning of an object model including building additional objects and executing rules and expressions with an interpreter.

29. The method of claim 9 including the further step of adding new assertions, modifying the user interface, and accessing a database with a rule action interpreter.

30. The method of claim 9 including the further step of providing object inheritance, state inheritance and event inheritance in the object modeling language.

31. The method of claim 9 including the further step of preserving changes implemented directly in source code when diagrams are subsequently modified.

32. The method of claim 31 including the further step of defining a set of named text-substitution macros to create files.

33. The method of claim 32 including the further step of recreating the original file in a specified directory.

34. The method of claim 33 including the further step of comparing the old file and the new file with a diff routine.

35. The method of claim 34 including the further step of employing a line number range generated by the diff routine to determine which macro was used to generate any affected text in the source code.

36. The method of claim 35 including the further step of creating an override file associated with the data file.

37. The method of claim 36 including the further step of determining differences in macro execution and, upon reaching a macro execution that contains lines that were changed, outputting an add or change record as appropriate.

38. The method of claim 9 including the further step of generating object diagrams which define database interaction.

39. The method of claim 38 including the further step of generating SQL statements with the object diagram.

40. The method of claim 39 including the further step of generating tables with the object diagram.

41. The method of claim 40 including the further step of generating queries with the object diagram.

42. The method of claim 41 including the further step of employing database-specific rules to link database functions to rule diagrams.

43. The method of claim 1 including the further step of graphically describing user interface functionality for the program by generating at least one user interface object diagram.

44. The method of claim 43 including the further step of automatically generating a user interface corresponding to the at least one user interface diagram.

45. The method of claim 1 including the further step of linking first and second objects by a multiplicity association indicating that the second object can be “

many”

in the relationship defined by the association.

46. The method of claim 1 including the further step of linking first and second objects by a multiplicity association indicating that both the first and second objects can be “

many”

in the relationship defined by the association.

47. A development tool for generating a software program in a predetermined language, comprising:

an interface through which functionality for the program is graphically described in at least one descriptive diagram, said at least one descriptive diagram including a rule diagram, said rule diagram including at least one rule, said rule including an object, a cause, and an effect, wherein said cause includes at least one condition, wherein said effect represents forming an instance of said object, and wherein said effect further includes at least one expression, and wherein said at least one expression assigns a value to an attribute of said instance of said object;

a tool user interface that generates an executable working model of the program from the at least one diagram, the working model being represented in an interpretable intermediate modeling language, wherein said working model is operable to evaluate said at least one expression to assign said value to said attribute of said instance of said object in the event that said condition is met, wherein said working model includes a plurality of special predicates containing type information regarding said object and said instance of said object, and wherein said working model is further operable to execute without checking said type information; and

a source code generator that provides source code in the predetermined language from the intermediate modeling language representation of the program, wherein said generated source code reflects said type information contained in said special predicates within said working model.

48. The tool of claim 47 further including an engine that automatically generates representative expressions in the intermediate modeling language in response to additive changes in the at least one descriptive diagram.

49. The tool of claim 48 wherein the engine automatically deletes intermediate modeling language expressions corresponding to deleted portions in the at least one descriptive diagram.

50. The tool of claim 47 further including an interface through which object diagrams in which objects are linked by associations are generated, the object diagrams defining relationships between objects.

51. The tool of claim 50 wherein type relations between objects are specified only for generation of the source code in the predetermined language.

52. The tool of claim 50 wherein inheritance is established between objects based on the associations that link objects.

53. The tool of claim 50 further including an engine through which at least one state diagram defining a plurality of states associated with at least one object in the object diagram and state sequences caused by inputted events is generated, the states being interconnected by transitions.

54. The tool of claim 53 wherein at least one event object diagram in which events that affect transitions in the state diagram are defined is generated.

55. The tool of claim 54 including an engine through which at least one rule diagram for defining activity within the program, the at least one rule diagram comprising rules and being employed to extend object diagrams and state diagrams such that the program operates in the desired manner is generated.

56. The tool of claim 55 wherein at least one cause and at least one effect are defined for each rule in the rule diagram.

57. The tool of claim 56 further including distinctive types of causes, each type associated with a respective distinct execution priority.

58. The tool of claim 56 wherein the at least one cause is comprised of a set of cause alternatives, each cause alternative being associated with an association in at least one object diagram.

59. The tool of claim 58 wherein each effect is a set of actions triggered by execution of a cause alternative.

60. The tool of claim 59 wherein each rule action is applied in sequential order at execution.

61. The tool of claim 60 wherein a cause alternative is deemed successful if the corresponding effect succeeds to execute.

62. The tool of claim 61 wherein the rule applicable to a given object is bound at runtime, the applicable rule being the innermost rule in the hierarchy.

63. The tool of claim 62 wherein each alternative in a cause is associated with an effect, and each effect is bound to one object.

64. The tool of claim 63 wherein execution of each associated rule action is sequentially attempted when an effect is executed.

65. The tool of claim 64 wherein the cause that called an effect is deemed completed if all of the associated rule actions are completed.

66. The tool of claim 65 wherein, when a rule action is not successful, execution of the corresponding effect is terminated and the next sequential alternative is attempted.

67. The tool of claim 66 wherein the alternative is performed sequentially and, if any of the alternative in the cause completes successfully, the associated rule is deemed completed.

68. The tool of claim 67 wherein the rule actions are performed sequentially.

69. The tool of claim 68 wherein, when a cause is not successful, a search is executed for a cause with a matching name bound to the superclass of the original object and the associated alternatives are executed.

70. The tool of claim 69 further including a planned association that is created when such association is established by a rule action.

71. The tool of claim 56 further including an iterator function that performs a cause on each object involved in a particular association.

72. The tool of claim 55 wherein associations are represented in the object modeling language as logical relationships that can be traversed in any direction.

73. The tool of claim 55 wherein generalization and aggregation are modeled by associations.

74. The tool of claim 55 wherein actions associated with the meaning of an object model including building additional objects and executing rules and expressions are performed with an interpreter.

75. The tool of claim 55 further including a rule action interpreter for adding new assertions, modifying the user interface, and accessing a database.

76. The tool of claim 55 wherein object inheritance, state inheritance and event inheritance are provided in the object modeling language.

77. The tool of claim 55 wherein changes implemented directly in source code are preserved when diagrams are subsequently modified.

78. The tool of claim 77 wherein a set of named text-substitution macros is defined to create files.

79. The tool of claim 78 wherein the original file in a specified directory is recreated.

80. The tool of claim 79 wherein the old file and the new file are compared with a diff routine.

81. The tool of claim 80 wherein a line number range generated by the diff routine is employed to determine which macro was used to generate any affected text in the source code.

82. The tool of claim 81 wherein an override file associated with the data file is created.

83. The tool of claim 82 wherein differences in macro execution are determined and, upon reaching a macro execution that contains lines that were changed, an add or change record is output as appropriate.

84. The tool of claim 55 further including an engine for generation of object diagrams which define database interaction.

85. The tool of claim 84 further including an engine for generating SQL statements from the object diagram.

86. The tool of claim 85 further including an engine for generating tables from the object diagram.

87. The tool of claim 86 further including an engine for generating queries from the object diagram.

88. The tool of claim 87 wherein database-specific rules are employed to link database functions to rule diagrams.

89. The tool of claim 47 further including an engine through which user interface functionality for the program is specified in at least one user interface object diagram.

90. The tool of claim 89 further including an interpreter which automatically generates a user interface corresponding to the at least one user interface diagram.

91. The tool of claim 47 further including a multiplicity association for linking first and second objects in a manner indicating that the second object can be “

many”

in the relationship defined by the association.

92. The tool of claim 47 further including a multiplicity association for linking first and second objects in a manner indicating that both the first and second objects can be “

many”

in the relationship defined by the association.