The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Designing Software for Ease of Extension and Contraction
Abstract
Designing software to be extensible and easily contracted is discussed as a special case of design for change. A number of ways that extension and contraction problems manifest themselves in current software are explained. Four steps in the design of software that is more flexible are then discussed. The most critical step is the design of a software structure called the " uses" relation. Some criteria for design decisions are given and illustrated using a small example. It is shown that the identification of minimal subsets and minimal extensions can lead to software that can be tailored to the needs of a broad variety of users.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Abstract data views: an interface specification concept to enhance design for reuse
Cowan, D. D., & Lucena, C. J. P. (1995) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/32.372150 · Cited by 103
Hopkins, A., & Booth, S. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society · doi:10.1145/3461702.3462527 · Cited by 40
(2010) · reroDoc Digital Library · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Parnas, D. L.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
- Published
- 1979-03
- Volume
- SE-5
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 128-138
- ISSN
- 0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-3520
- 2326-3881
- OpenAlex
- W2107232214
- Cited by
- 702
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
