Model-based software engineering gains further attention these days. To better support it, the use of constraint languages is important in order to bridge expressiveness gaps and eliminate ambiguity. Nevertheless, the use of model-based constraint languages, like the Object Constraint Language (OCL), is quite limited and the specification of constraints is left to the implementation stage. One option for these practices might be the misconception that model-based constraint languages are difficult to work with. In this paper, we examine the usages of representative constraint languages, namely OCL, for model-based constraint languages, and Java, for implementation-based constraint languages. In particular, we examine their usage in understanding and developing constraints. We evaluate these usages via a controlled experiment with 110 Information Systems Engineering undergraduate students. We found out that using OCL outperforms using Java for both understanding and developing constraints. Yet, the students had more confidence with Java. The results indicate that the aforementioned misconception is wrong and there is a need for further education regarding model-based constraints languages, so to get more practice and confidence.

如今，基于模型的软件工程得到了越来越多的关注。为了更好地支持它，使用约束语言对于弥合表达能力差距和消除歧义很重要。但是，基于模型的约束语言（如对象约束语言（OCL））的使用受到很大限制，约束的规范留给实施阶段。这些实践的一种选择可能是误解基于模型的约束语言难以使用。在本文中，我们研究了代表性约束语言的用法，即基于模型的约束语言的OCL和基于实现的约束语言的Java。特别是，我们研究了它们在理解和发展约束方面的用法。我们通过与110名信息系统工程本科生进行的对照实验评估了这些用法。我们发现，在理解和开发约束方面，使用OCL优于使用Java。但是，学生们对Java有更多的信心。结果表明，上述误解是错误的，需要对基于模型的约束语言进行进一步的教育，以便获得更多的实践和信心。