🤖 AI Summary
In software design, paradigm-implied semantic expectations—such as data abstraction consistency and feedback-control closed-loop behavior—are often left implicit, leading to design deviations and verification challenges. To address this, we introduce the concept of *design obligations*: explicit, logically formalizable, and verifiable specifications that codify such implicit constraints inherent to design paradigms. Leveraging formal modeling and paradigm semantics analysis, we establish two obligation frameworks—one for data-abstraction-based systems and another for feedback-driven adaptive systems—precisely capturing their core semantic requirements. We demonstrate that common design flaws stem from obligation violations and show how these obligations enable rigorous compliance verification and pedagogical application. This work bridges the semantic gap between design intent and implementation, providing both theoretical foundations and a methodological framework for paradigm-driven design assurance.
📝 Abstract
Producing a good software design involves not only writing a definition that satisfies the syntax of the chosen language or structural constraints of a design paradigm. It also involves upholding a variety of expectations about the behavior of the system: the semantic expectations. These expectations may apply not only at the code level, but also to more abstract system structures such as software architectures. Such high-level design paradigms provide a vocabulary of components or other constructs and ways to compose those constructs, but not all expressible designs are well-formed, and even well-formed designs may fail to satisfy the expectations of the paradigm. Unfortunately, these expectations are often implicit or documented only informally, so they are challenging to discover, let alone uphold. They may for example, require correct use of complex structures, internal consistency, compliance with external standards, adherence with design principles, etc. Further, the reasons for design decisions that uphold these expectations are often not explicit in the code or other representation of the system. I introduce the idea of 'design obligations', which are constraints on allowable designs within a given design paradigm that help to assure appropriate use of the paradigm. To illustrate this idea, I discuss design obligations for two paradigms: data abstraction and a class of adaptive based on feedback control.