Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Difference between revisions of "QVTd/Articles"
(→Articles and Presentations) |
(→Articles and Presentations) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
This invited paper was withdrawn at the camera-ready stage when it finally dawned that a trace for resolution was not identical to a trace for re-execution. The QVT 1.3 specification was updated to remove the suggestion that they are the same. | This invited paper was withdrawn at the camera-ready stage when it finally dawned that a trace for resolution was not identical to a trace for re-execution. The QVT 1.3 specification was updated to remove the suggestion that they are the same. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == 2014-2015 / Mars== | ||
== 2013-2014 / Luna == | == 2013-2014 / Luna == | ||
| Line 21: | Line 23: | ||
QVT status and Eclipse QVTd plans. | QVT status and Eclipse QVTd plans. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [http://www.eclipse.org/mmt/qvt/docs/ASE2013/ase13.pdf "QVT Imperative - A practical foundation for declarative transformation execution"], Horacio Hoyos, Dimitris Kolovos, Edward Willink, [http://www.ase2013.org/ "28th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering"], November 2013 | ||
| + | |||
| + | (Submission not accepted) | ||
| + | |||
| + | The early enthusiasm, in 2002, for model to model transformation languages led to eight submissions for an OMG standard comprising three languages, yet no commercial products have appeared. The QVT Core language was intended as the foundation for QVT Relations but the available implementations have ignored the core language. Rather than ignoring the core language, we take the opposite approach and introduce three more core languages. Progressive semantic simplification through these core language terminates in an imperative unidirectional language that facilitates implementation. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [http://www.eclipse.org/mmt/qvt/docs/ICMT2013/icmt13_52.pdf "QVT Imperative - A practical semantics for declarative transformations"], Horacio Hoyos, Dimitris Kolovos, Edward Willink, [http://www.model-transformation.org/ICMT2013/ "6th The International Conference on Model Transformation (ICMT)"], June 2013 | ||
| + | |||
| + | [http://www.eclipse.org/mmt/qvt/docs/ICMT2013/icmt13_52_ea.pdf "Extended abstract"] accepted. | ||
| + | [http://www.eclipse.org/mmt/qvt/docs/ICMT2013/ICMT2013/icmt2013_talk.odp "slides"]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The early enthusiasm, in 2002, for model to model transformation languages led to eight submissions for an OMG standard comprising three languages, yet no commercial products have appeared. The QVT Core language was intended as the foundation for QVT Relations but the available implementations have ignored the core language. Rather than ignoring the core language, we take the opposite approach and introduce three more core languages. Progressive program-to-program transformation through these core languages terminates in an easily implemented imperative language that supports declarative transformations. | ||
Revision as of 18:51, 22 July 2016
Contents
Articles and Presentations
2016-2017 / Oxygen
- "Optimized declarative transformation - First Eclipse QVTc results", E.D.Willink, "BigMDE: Scalable Model Driven Engineering (BigMDE 016)", July 2016
First results of the new Eclipse QVTc implementation demonstrating scalability and major speedups through the use of metamodel-driven scheduling and direct Java code generation.
2015-2016 / Neon
- "Traceability: What does it really mean for QVT?", E.D.Willink, [http://www.big-mde.eu/ "Fourth Workshop on the
Analysis of Model Transformations (AMT 2015)"], October 2015
Traceability in Model Transformation languages supports not only post-execution analysis, but also incremental update and co-ordination of repetition. The Query/View/Transformation family of languages specify a form of traceability that unifies high and low level abstraction in declarative and imperative transformation languages. Unfortunately this aspect of the QVT specification is little more than an aspiration. We identify axioms that resolve the conflicting requirements on traceability, and provide a foundation for resolving further issues regarding equality, transformation extension and mapping refinement.
This invited paper was withdrawn at the camera-ready stage when it finally dawned that a trace for resolution was not identical to a trace for re-execution. The QVT 1.3 specification was updated to remove the suggestion that they are the same.
2014-2015 / Mars
2013-2014 / Luna
- "QVT State of the Art", E.D.Willink, OMG quarterly meeting, March 2014
QVT status and Eclipse QVTd plans.
- "QVT Imperative - A practical foundation for declarative transformation execution", Horacio Hoyos, Dimitris Kolovos, Edward Willink, "28th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering", November 2013
(Submission not accepted)
The early enthusiasm, in 2002, for model to model transformation languages led to eight submissions for an OMG standard comprising three languages, yet no commercial products have appeared. The QVT Core language was intended as the foundation for QVT Relations but the available implementations have ignored the core language. Rather than ignoring the core language, we take the opposite approach and introduce three more core languages. Progressive semantic simplification through these core language terminates in an imperative unidirectional language that facilitates implementation.
- "QVT Imperative - A practical semantics for declarative transformations", Horacio Hoyos, Dimitris Kolovos, Edward Willink, "6th The International Conference on Model Transformation (ICMT)", June 2013
"Extended abstract" accepted. "slides".
The early enthusiasm, in 2002, for model to model transformation languages led to eight submissions for an OMG standard comprising three languages, yet no commercial products have appeared. The QVT Core language was intended as the foundation for QVT Relations but the available implementations have ignored the core language. Rather than ignoring the core language, we take the opposite approach and introduce three more core languages. Progressive program-to-program transformation through these core languages terminates in an easily implemented imperative language that supports declarative transformations.