comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: jim_snead <basswoodNObaSPAM@my-deja.com.invalid>
Subject: Re: Is Apex dead as an environment for Ada & Java?
Date: 1999/11/30
Date: 1999-11-30T00:00:00+00:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <00844d40.d1370134@usw-ex0107-043.remarq.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: x7vaenv4vle.fsf@pogner.demon.co.uk

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2015 bytes --]

In article <x7vaenv4vle.fsf@pogner.demon.co.uk>, Simon Wright
<simon@pogner.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Martin Dowie <martin@dowie-cs.demon.co.uk> writes:
> > Apex describe them on their web site -
> > "Rational Apex provides a framework for defining architectural
> > components, known as Rational Subsystems�. These subsystems
> > integrate with the Rational Apex version control system and with Ad
> > 95 package hierarchies. Rational Apex prevents undesirable code
> > references by controlling visibility among architectural
> > components. Attempts to improperly reference units results in
> > compile time error messages. In this way, subsystems enable
> > automatically express and enforce the large-scale structure, or
> > architecture, of their applications."
> Subsystems may be good for a lot of things, but this particular one
> has always struck me as odd; especially in an environment where
> code is designed before it's implemented, and inspected afterwards.

For an OO design we may have a sea of classes created through
an OO drawing tool. I wonder what leverage Apex adds here.
I sense that they are unsure where the architectural enforcement
should come in to play.

1. Design (OO model)  - Enforce the architecture via a tool like Rose
2. Implementation  - Transcription of design, no enforcement necessary
3. Inspection - Check that transcription was correct

Rose can do the enforcement and Apex can do the enforcement, but
how can Apex enforce something that was not in the original
OO model (such as the notion of visibility control)?  And
if these were in the original model, then they would clearly
map into things like Ada 95 private packages. In which case
you would not need the Apex subsystems to enforce anything!

I do agree with you that it is odd and very confusing when you
consider the early design. Thanks for the insight.




* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!





  reply	other threads:[~1999-11-30  0:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1999-11-26  0:00 Is Apex dead as an environment for Ada & Java? jim_snead
1999-11-28  0:00 ` Martin Dowie
1999-11-28  0:00   ` jim_snead
1999-11-28  0:00     ` mike_zebrowski
1999-11-28  0:00       ` jim_snead
1999-11-29  0:00         ` Samuel T. Harris
1999-11-29  0:00           ` jim_snead
1999-11-29  0:00             ` John Duncan
1999-11-30  0:00               ` reason67
1999-12-01  0:00               ` Robert Dewar
1999-11-30  0:00                 ` John Duncan
1999-11-30  0:00             ` Martin Dowie
1999-11-30  0:00             ` Samuel T. Harris
1999-12-01  0:00             ` Aidan Skinner
1999-12-02  0:00               ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-03  0:00                 ` Simon Wright
1999-12-03  0:00               ` David C. Hoos, Sr.
1999-11-29  0:00         ` reason67
1999-11-29  0:00           ` jim_snead
1999-11-30  0:00             ` reason67
1999-11-30  0:00               ` jim_snead
1999-11-30  0:00             ` Martin Dowie
1999-11-30  0:00         ` Martin Dowie
1999-11-29  0:00       ` jim_snead
1999-11-30  0:00         ` Samuel T. Harris
1999-11-30  0:00           ` jim_snead
1999-12-01  0:00             ` Samuel T. Harris
1999-11-30  0:00     ` Martin Dowie
1999-11-30  0:00       ` jim_snead
1999-12-01  0:00       ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-01  0:00         ` Martin Dowie
1999-12-01  0:00     ` jim_snead
1999-12-02  0:00       ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-02  0:00       ` Ted Dennison
1999-12-02  0:00         ` Larry Kilgallen
1999-12-09  0:00           ` Mark Hertel
1999-12-11  0:00         ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-11  0:00           ` Richard D Riehle
1999-12-11  0:00             ` Marin D. Condic
1999-12-11  0:00             ` Marin D. Condic
1999-12-11  0:00             ` Marin D. Condic
1999-12-11  0:00             ` Marin D. Condic
1999-11-30  0:00   ` Simon Wright
1999-11-30  0:00     ` jim_snead [this message]
1999-11-30  0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1999-11-30  0:00   ` jim_snead
1999-12-01  0:00     ` Larry Kilgallen
1999-12-01  0:00 ` Andreas Winckler
1999-12-01  0:00   ` David W. Glessner
1999-12-01  0:00   ` jim_snead
1999-12-02  0:00     ` Andreas Winckler
1999-12-02  0:00     ` Samuel T. Harris
1999-12-02  0:00       ` jim_snead
1999-12-06  0:00         ` Samuel T. Harris
1999-12-18  0:00         ` Steven Hovater
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1999-11-26  0:00 Tom_Hargraves
1999-11-26  0:00 ` jim_snead
1999-11-26  0:00   ` Steven Hovater
1999-11-26  0:00     ` jim_snead
1999-12-09  0:00       ` Wes Groleau
1999-12-12  0:00         ` jim_snead
1999-11-27  0:00     ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-09  0:00   ` Henrik Delin
     [not found] ` <01bf3857$22ca59a0$022a6282@dieppe>
1999-11-26  0:00   ` Ed Falis
     [not found]   ` <01bf38cc$04d205e0$022a6282@dieppe>
1999-11-27  0:00     ` jim_snead
1999-12-18  0:00       ` Steven Hovater
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox