OPEN ACCESS
Maintainability and Usability are developing software quality properties, which assume a key part in deciding the nature of a product framework. Directly, little research exertion has been committed to estimation of Maintainability and ease of use of protest arranged software framework either subjectively or quantitatively by utilizing fuzzy parts of both the factor. All the more essentially, neither any fuzzy model exists for measuring above quality components nor does a particular model presents noteworthy rules in such manner. This proposed work makes a commitment to the field of software quality and its maintenance by showing object-arranged measurements for measuring practicality and ease of use and the time factor reduction and the maintenance cost. The protest arranged measurements have an immediate association with quality elements and they can be utilized as indicators of the practicality and convenience of question situated software frameworks productively. The proposed work formally characterizes question arranged measurements remembering that Maintainability and ease of use for the most part affect on software quality. It additionally proposes model and interesting estimation techniques to assess Maintainability and ease of use of protest arranged framework. The measure of exertion expected to keep up a product framework is identified with the specialized nature of the source code of that framework. The ISO 9126 model for programming item quality perceives viability as one of the 6 principle attributes of programming item quality, with versatility, variability, dependability, and testability as sub characteristics of viability. Astoundingly, ISO 9126 does not give a consensual arrangement of measures for assessing practicality based on a framework's source code. Then again, the Maintainability Index has been proposed to compute a solitary number that communicates the practicality of a framework. To expand nature of a product, to oversee programming more effective and to diminish cost of the product, practicality, viability estimation and practicality assessment models have been proposed. In any case, the down to earth utilization of these models in programming building devices and practice stayed minimal because of their impediments or dangers to legitimacy. In the proposed technique We have utilized fuzzy rationale for measuring the product Maintainability. Protest situated measurements have been utilized as info factors in a fuzzy surmising motor. Fuzzy approach in blend with file layered strategy is utilized as a part of the estimation of ease of use of question situated software framework. Utilizing instrument robotization, the estimations of question situated measurements were acquired. A question arranged quality model additionally has been proposed.
Software, Maintainability, Utilizability, Fuzzy logic
[1] Pigoski, T. Practical Software Maintenance. Wiley computer publishing, 1997.
[2] AL-Badareen, Anas Bassam, et al. The impact of software quality on maintenance process. 2010, ACM International Journal of Computers, vol. 2.
[3] Ian Somerville, Software Engineering Chapter 21, Evolution Process 7th edition published by Dorling Kindersley(India) pvt. ltd. copyright © 2004.
[4] Lionel C. Briand, Christian Bunse, and John W. Daly. A controlled experiment for evaluating quality guidelines on the maintainability of object-oriented designs, 2001. IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 513–530.
[5] S. R. Chidamber, C. F. Kemerer. A metrics suite for object oriented design, 1994, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 476–493.
[6] Don M. Coleman, Dan Ash, Bruce Lowther, Paul W. Oman. Using metrics to evaluate software system maintainability, 1994. IEEE Computer, vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 44–49.
[7] Ward Cunningham. The WYcash portfolio management system. In OOPSLA ’92: Addendum to the proceedings on Object-oriented software systems, languages, and applications (Addendum), 1992, pp. 29–30, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
[8] Alain April, Alain Abran. Software maintenance management: evaluation and continuous improvement, 2012. Vol. 67. John Wiley & Sons.
[9] James W. Paulson, Member, IEEE, Giancarlo Succi, Member, IEEE Computer Society, and Armin Eberlein, Member, IEEE Computer Society, An Empirical Study of Open-Source and Closed-Source Software Products, 2004, IEEE transactions on software engineering, vol. 30, no. 4.
[10] P. F. Tiako, maintenance in joint software development, in computer software and applications conference, 2002. COMPSAC 2002. proceedings. 26th annual international, pp. 1077-1080.
[11] Don Coleman, Dan Ash, Hewlett-Packard Bruce Lowther, Paul Oman, Using Metrics to Evaluate Software System Maintainability, NlX-9162194/$4.00 © IEEE
[12] Lincke Rüdiger, Jonas Lundberg, Welf Löwe. Comparing software metrics tools, 2008. Proceedings of the 2008 international symposium on Software testing and analysis. ACM.
[13] Liang Ping. A Quantitative Approach to Software Maintainability Prediction. In Information Technology and Applications (IFITA), 2010 International Forum on, vol. 1, pp. 105-108. IEEE.
[14] Sepasmoghaddam, Alireza, and Hassan Rashidi. A novel method to measure comprehensive complexity of software based on the metrics statistical model. Computer Modeling and Simulation (EMS), 2010 Fourth UKSim European Symposium on. IEEE.
[15] T. E. Tutt, et al. Risk-informed Preventive Maintenance optimization. Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS), 2012 Proceedings-Annual. IEEE.
[16] Majdi Abdellatief, Abu Bakar Md Sultan, A. A. Ghani, Marzanah A. Jabar. Multidimentional size measure for design of component-based software system. Software, IET 6, no. 4 (2012): 350-357.
[17] Sneed, Harry M., Katalin Erdos. Measuring and Evaluating a DotNet Application System to Better Predict Maintenance Effort. Software Measurement and the 2012 Seventh International Conference on Software Process and Product Measurement (IWSM-MENSURA), 2012 Joint Conference of the 22nd International Workshop on. IEEE.
[18] Martin Kunz, Reiner R. Dumke, Andreas Schmietendorf. How to measure agile software development, 2008, pp. 95–101.
[19] Mika V. Mäntylä, Casper Lassenius. Drivers for software refactoring decisions. In ISESE ’06: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM/IEEE International symposium on Empirical software engineering, pp. 297–306, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
[20] Mika V. Mäntylä, Casper Lassenius. Subjective evaluation of software evolvability using code smells: An empirical study, 2006. Empirical Softw. Engg., vol. 11, pp. 3, pp. 395–431.
[21] Naouel Moha, Yann-Gael Gueheneuc, Laurence Duchien, AnneFrancoise Le Meur. Decor: A method for the specification and detection of code and design smells, 2010, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 20–36.
[22] http://blogs.msdn.com/b/zainnab/archive/2011/05/26/code-metrics maintainabilityindex.aspx?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zainnab+%28Visua l+Studio+Tips+and+Tricks%29.