Software Component Architecture

Discussion in 'Java' started by Aned, Dec 6, 2005.

  1. Aned

    Aned Guest

    The term component architecture is widely used, its meaning is the
    internal components, connectors and configurations. However, to me, it
    seems a bit vague!

    for example, what is the meaning of JavaBeans Architecture, does the
    previous meaning still apply?

    In my opinion, I believe that a component should have two kinds of
    - internal architecture: this reflects the internal components,
    connectors, and configuration.
    - external architecture: this indicates that the component should
    conform to its interface. hence its interface has certain architecture,
    this will be the component's external architecture.

    so we could distinguish between components according to their external

    any opinion?
    Aned, Dec 6, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Aned

    Chris Smith Guest

    I might have an opinion, but I'm still trying to figure out what you

    Certainly design is hierarchical, in that each piece of the design at
    the top level may be further designed. So at a given level, you might
    identify a component and says that it has "internal" and "external"
    design, by which you would mean the levels of design directly above and
    below the existence of this component. Sometimes the word
    "architecture" is used to apply to software design at the top level.
    Sometimes it means other things, depending on to whom you are speaking.
    Of course, the word "component" itself is rather ambiguous, too.

    So, if you clarify your meaning, you might get more (and more useful)

    The Easiest Way To Train Anyone... Anywhere.

    Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer
    MindIQ Corporation
    Chris Smith, Dec 6, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. Aned

    Aned Guest

    I regard components as source code fragments with interface. So the
    internal architecture of a component will be the sub-components, and
    their communications. while the external architecture of a component is
    its interface. In fact I distinguish between two types of interfaces.
    - functional interface: this is responsible of acquiring and providing
    - architectural interface: , this is my interest actually, this is
    responsible of allowing a component to be plugged automatically to a
    certain architecture. for example, Applet has 4 methods that need to be
    satisfied in order to be able to work under internet explorer. I'd
    define the "architectural interface" as the interface that define the
    life cycle methods of a component.

    so, what I want to achieve is to use component interface(i.e.
    architectural interface) to distinguish between components (i.e.
    Classify components). I wonder if this kind of classification is
    effective for reusing components?
    Aned, Dec 6, 2005
  4. is the next door to the right. F'up set.

    Thomas Weidenfeller, Dec 6, 2005
  5. Aned

    Shin Guest

    There are quite a lot plug-in architectures. You can certainly
    classify them accordingly. But what do you mean by "reusing"?
    Classification alone can not improve reusability.

    Shin, Dec 6, 2005
  6. Aned

    Chris Uppal Guest

    Eh !? What are you talking about ? Aned's post wasn't any form of advocacy.

    -- chris
    Chris Uppal, Dec 6, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.