<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<title>P179 - FM+AM`2010 - Second International Workshop on Formal Methods and Agile Methods</title>
<link href="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/19656" rel="alternate"/>
<subtitle/>
<id>http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/19656</id>
<updated>2026-07-21T13:36:04Z</updated>
<dc:date>2026-07-21T13:36:04Z</dc:date>
<entry>
<title>FM+AM`2010 – Second International Workshop on Formal Methods and Agile Methods</title>
<link href="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/19662" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name/>
</author>
<id>http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/19662</id>
<updated>2019-01-17T10:55:42Z</updated>
<published>2010-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">FM+AM`2010 – Second International Workshop on Formal Methods and Agile Methods
Gruner, Stefan; Rumpe, Bernhard
</summary>
<dc:date>2010-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Agile formality: A "Mole" of software engineering practices</title>
<link href="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/19658" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Bianco, Vieri del</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Stosic, Dragan</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Kiniry, Joseph R.</name>
</author>
<id>http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/19658</id>
<updated>2019-01-17T10:55:42Z</updated>
<published>2010-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">Agile formality: A "Mole" of software engineering practices
Bianco, Vieri del; Stosic, Dragan; Kiniry, Joseph R.
Gruner, Stefan; Rumpe, Bernhard
Members of the agile programming and formal methods communities do not always see eye-to-eye. These two communities often do not talk to or learn from each other. Only recently, as highlighted by the September 2009 issue of IEEE Software, the IFIP workshop on balancing agility and formalism in software engineering, and the first edition of the international workshop for formal methods and agile methods, ideas from the two communities begun synthesize. While the problem-solving approaches and psychological attitudes of members of the two communities differ widely, we exploit this clash of viewpoints, creating a new development processes that actually blends, rather than mashes together, best practices from the two worlds. This paper summarizes our process and a supporting complex case study, showing that it is not only possible, but tasty, to combine the “chili pepper” of formal methods and the “chocolate” of agile programming, thus producing a tasty “Mole” (as in the highlyspiced Mexican sauce) of software engineering practices.
</summary>
<dc:date>2010-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>State-based coverage analysis and UML-driven equivalence checking for C++ state machines</title>
<link href="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/19659" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Heckeler, Patrick</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Behrend, Jörg</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Kropf, Thomas</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Ruf, Jürgen</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Rosenstiel, Wolfgang</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Weiss, Roland</name>
</author>
<id>http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/19659</id>
<updated>2019-01-17T10:55:42Z</updated>
<published>2010-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">State-based coverage analysis and UML-driven equivalence checking for C++ state machines
Heckeler, Patrick; Behrend, Jörg; Kropf, Thomas; Ruf, Jürgen; Rosenstiel, Wolfgang; Weiss, Roland
Gruner, Stefan; Rumpe, Bernhard
This paper presents a methodology using an instrumentation-based behavioral checker to detect behavioral deviations of a C++ object implementing a finite state machine (FSM) and the corresponding specification defined as a UML state chart. The approach is able to link the source code with the appropriate states and provides a coverage analysis to show which states have been covered by unit, system and integration tests. Furthermore, the approach provides statistical information about the distribution of covered lines of code among all included files and directories. As a proof of concept the presented approach has been implemented in terms of a C++-library and has been successfully applied to OPC UA, an industrial automation infrastructure software.
</summary>
<dc:date>2010-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Are formal methods ready for agility? A reality check</title>
<link href="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/19657" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Gorm Larsen, Peter</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Fitzgerald, John</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Wolff, Sune</name>
</author>
<id>http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/19657</id>
<updated>2019-01-17T10:55:42Z</updated>
<published>2010-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">Are formal methods ready for agility? A reality check
Gorm Larsen, Peter; Fitzgerald, John; Wolff, Sune
Gruner, Stefan; Rumpe, Bernhard
The integration of agile software development techniques with formal methods has attracted attention as a research topic. But what exactly is to be gained from attempting to combine two approaches which are seen as orthogonal or even opposing, and to what extent do formal methods already support the principles of agility? Based on the authors' experience in applying lightweight tool-supported formal methods in industrial projects, this paper assesses the readiness of formal methods technologies for supporting agile techniques and identified areas in which new research could improve the prospects of synergy between the two approaches in future.
</summary>
<dc:date>2010-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
</feed>
