Omnigraffle pro 5.3.2 how to#

When anomalies in architecturally relevant SC are detected and corrected, the corresponding SA problems should also be fixed to maintain a system. When an SA is modified to satisfy new requirements, its corresponding SC also gets changed when a software system evolves for avoiding architecture erosion. SA elements of a system can also be reconstructed by reengineering the SC elements of a system. During the software development life cycle, architectural level elements, e.g., modules, components, decisions, tactics and patterns are transformed to low-level design elements to be implemented. Several different approaches already address the problem of narrowing the gap to align and evolve SA with SC over time.

Omnigraffle pro 5.3.2 how to#

Even if SA is well documented or updated, it is still a challenge about how to embody SA in implementation and update SA and SC synchronously for ensuring their consistency during software evolution. This gap leads to a problematic situation exacerbated by a general lack of efforts allocated to keep the SA documentation updated. Due to the difference in the abstraction levels (i.e., HL and LL), there exists a gap between SA and Source Code (SC). The representation of SA is described from different perspectives by using architectural styles, views, patterns, tactics and decisions. Whilst SA has become a mature area of research and practice in Software Engineering (SE) over the last 30 years (since 1980s), there is still no consensus on what exactly SA is. From this perspective, SA is defined as a set of architecture design decisions.

It characterizes the key design decisions taken to achieve the functional and non-functional requirements of a system. Software Architecture (SA) represents the high-level structure of a software system.