Software Mumbles and Grumbles

The Code Generation 2009 Call for Speakers is now available.

Session proposals are sought covering topics such as:

- Tool and technology adoption
- Code Generation and Model Transformation tools and approaches
- Defining and implementing modelling languages
- Domain Analysis and Domain Engineering
- Software Product Lines
- Language evolution and modularization
- Meta Modelling
- Runtime virtual machines versus direct code generation

The submission deadline is Friday January 16th 2009. Accepted session leaders have their conference fees waived.

Visit www.codegeneration.net/cg2009/ for more information about the conference.

If you haven’t caught it yet, there’s a DSM Forum Group on LinkedIn now. If you’re interested in DSM and are on LinkedIn, I invite you to join.

www.linkedin.com/e/gis/138803/1CEC711F113E

In the run up to OOPSLA in October, the organizers are putting together a series of podcasts to highlight key topics that will be a part of this year’s conference. In a recent episode, Dr. Juha-Pekka Tolvanen of MetaCase talks about the DSM workshop at OOPLSA and some of the trends in the Domain-Specific Modeling and languages.

http://www.oopsla.org/oopsla2008/content_include/podcast/oopsla200802.mp3

The latest issue of ESE (Embedded Systems Engineering) landed on my desk this morning. Of interest to readers of this blog would be the article by Mark Dalgarno and Matthew Fowler entitled ‘UML versus Domain-Specific Languages’, which mentions MetaCase.

I would agree with most of the distinctions the authors made between UML and DSLs, but I do think they were a little to lenient on the UML side. Particularly the comment that “Using UML profiles gives you as much expressive power as DSLs”. I would disagree with this in theory, but more important, in real terms. I’ve yet to see any UML+profile language that has nearly the expressive power of a well constructed DSL. The numbers just aren’t there to support the claim either. Users of MetaEdit+ (the leading DSL/DSM tool) consistently report productivity increases of 500-1000%; there is nothing being put forwarded from the UML supporters that even comes close to this. Using profile makes sense if you want to add few minor constructs to the UML. By basing the language on UML the possibilities on raising the abstraction higher are not available. Keeping in the low abstract level hinders then the possibilities for productivity increase.

An issue where the authors hit the nail right on the head was in the idea of code generation. The ability to generate full, production-quality code from models is what it’s all about. However, again here I see that DSLs have a big leg up on UML and is fundamentally why the authors and I agree that UML tools will continue to lose out to DSLs.

The article concludes with the statement that UML tools can add non-UML support (i.e. DSL support) and then compete with DSL tools. But at this point is it still a UML tool? UML has its place, but its not code generation. It will still take a while before it will disappear as a code generation approach, but the signs are certainly there that it will happen. The issue is that software vendors have invested money and time in developing these tools and as its clear the market is turning away from them they are trying now to re-brand themselves as DSL tool vendors (”we’ll slap profile support on it and call it a DSL tool”). The problem is that the underlying tool architecture just isn’t there for these UML tools to adequately support DSLs. This leaves nothing left for these companies to do except promote themselves as some sort of ‘hybrid tool’ which to me means that they are good at doing something you don’t want to do (i.e. UML) and poor at supporting what you actually want to do (i.e. DSL / DSM). What’s the advantage of that? The fundamental idea of DSM is that it’s better to use a modeling language that you design to meet your organization’s specific needs. After all, who knows better than you how your software should be developed? Doesn’t it make sense that having a tool specifically designed for that purpose would be better as well?

In a about 2 hours, Dr. Juha-Pekka Tolvanen, CEO of MetaCase, will be delivering the first of 2 talks at Dr. Dobb’s Architecture and Design World conference in Chicago. This first talk, Building DSM Languages with Full Code Generation, begins today at 1:30 (local time) and lasts until 5:00. The second talk is scheduled for tomorrow, 22 July, from 3:30 to 5:00 and is entitled Moving from Coding to Model-Driven Development. Both talks should be must sees for anyone interested in DSM or MDSD.

Tomorrow is miniSPA 2008, in London. It’s a free, one-day conference containing the highlighted talks from the main SPA conference earlier in the year. MetaCase consultant Risto Pohjonen will be presenting a tutorial from 14:45 to 16:00 on using DSM for full code generation.

MetaCase has again been named to the SD Times 100 list of the most influential organizations in the software development industry. This is the second year in a row that MetaCase has won the award in the Modeling category, and is a strong sign of the positive direction in which DSM is currently moving.

For more information visit www.metacase.com/news/sdtimes100-2008.html

Those of you looking to step up your level of understanding regarding DSM and MDD should consider attending Software Architect 2008 in London, UK from 3-5 June. MetaCase’s CTO, Dr. Steven Kelly,  will be present a full-day pre-conference workshop on the 3rd entitled “Building Domain-Specific Modelling Languages with Full Code Generation“. The workshop is targeted at those with an intermediate or advanced understanding of DSM; architects and team leaders with an interest in model-based software development should seriously think of attending.

There will also be two additional presentations on the 5th if you are not able to attend the full-day workshop. Times and links to further information can be found on MetaCase’s website http://www.metacase.com/fairs.html .

I came across an interesting post from Jeffrey Ricker which offers and introductory discussion on MDD. Many of the benefits of MDD were well presented, but I had to disagree with the fundamental assertions that Eclipse is God’s gift to MDD.

Eclipse has helped increase the exposure and profile of MDD (there are a lot of Eclipse users), but it is far from being the best platform for MDD. The author justifies his view by broadly dismissing all proprietary MDD tools on the grounds that companies are not interested in proprietary tools. In my experience, companies are looking for the solution that offers them the best results/value and that they can depend on. There is no doubt that MetaEdit+ is technologically superior to any of the MDD tools offered for Eclipse, but that is my opinion. The proof is in the pudding, and if you look at the productivity and quality improvements achieved by MetaEdit+ customers, and compare that to Eclipse users, you’ll see why I am confident in making that statement.

On the other criteria, dependability, MetaEdit+ also has a striking advantage. Eclipse’s entry into the domain-specific modeling arena has been fairly recent, whereas MetaEdit+ has been used successfully since the early 90’s. Besides that, with MetaEdit+ there is a brilliant team of developers that are there to support customers every step of the way. With the ability to easily export all data to XML or to integrate with other tools via the SOAP based API, any residual fear that could potentially come from working with a proprietary tool are eliminated.

The European Conference on Model Driven Architecture Foundations and Applications (ECMDA 2008) will be held in Berlin from 09-12 June. This is the fourth year the conference, but this year seems to be blurring the line on the general-purpose vs. domain-specific positions.

MetaCase’s CEO has been invited to give a special, full-day tutorial on the benefits of Domain-Specific Modeling. It’s not what you might expect to hear at a conference on MDA, but I guess even the diehard MDA supporters recognize a good thing when they hear it… Just one more sign of the continuing decline in UML, and the rising influence of DSM.

Early bird pricing is available through Thursday, 15 May and will save you about 15% of the regular price.

Monday, 9 June 2008 (full day tutorial)

Domain-Specific Modeling for Full Code Generation