From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ab3a570d8b1d6a7f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Lionel Draghi <LioDraghi@filnet.fr>
Subject: Re: UML to Ada mapping
Date: 1999/01/16
Message-ID: <36A0696C.B02F59D4@filnet.fr>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 433450396
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <36993EA5.F5A29C5F@filnet.fr> <369D2FA6.535EC87D@fhtw-berlin.de>
 <3.0.3.32.19990115095018.00750514@sorbonne>
To: Nasser Kettani <nkettani@Rational.Com>
X-Accept-Language: fr-FR, en, it
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-01-16T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Nasser Kettani wrote:
> 
> NO NO NO NO.
> 
> I have never said that Rose allows Round Trip Engineering (RTE) for Ada.
> 
>              I was proud to say exactly the contrary.
> 

Ok, i apologize to spread my misunderstanding.

> I reacted to Softeam saying that RTE was EASY for Ada since they claim RTE
> support
> for C++ and Java.
> And my reaction was to say that for Ada, it is quite difficult and Rose
> does not
> support it.
> 
> However, there might be some misunderstanding regarding RTE definiion.
> 
> Our definition of RTE is that we maintain consistency between code and the
> UML model
> WHATEVER the user does. Especially, if the user modifies the code after
> generation
> and adds design information in the code as as a new class, a new association,
> a new inheritance relationship, ...
> 
> In this case, talking about RTE for Ada is misleading.
> 
> If your definition of RTE is
>         -1 model
>         -2 generate code
>         -3 modify code
>         -4 modify manually the model
>         -5 regenerate code and keep changes.
> 
>                 so, Rose supports that for Ada95
> 
I have no definition for RTE, but yours seems to be the best that one
can expect from a tool for the code generation point.
However, the process above described can be also effective.
It is a reasonable constraint to do, as described by Sylvain Wallez,
"structural" modifications in the tools, and coding details outside. I
had also a conclusive experience doing so with Intecs HOOD tools.
The important point, i think, is that the tools should be able to
import/export the code part outside of its scope without problems.

> Regards
> 
> Nasser
> 
> >Relating to your opinion on the UML and UML tools maturity, tools
> >providers obviously don't agree with you. Today, Nasser Ketani
> >(Rational) was proud to precise that Rose allows Round Trip Engineering
> >even with Ada, although it is not as obvious as in Java or C++.
> >
> 
> Nasser Kettani
> ************
...

________________________________________________________________________
Lionel Draghi              

http://ada.eu.org/gtkada/                              http://attac.org/