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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,8fbb80525a3ce8ee X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-19 21:32:59 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3BF9EB02.D9946B9B@acm.org> From: Jeffrey Carter X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: UML & Ada References: <9tc0qk$cee$1@nh.pace.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 05:32:59 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.86.210.235 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net 1006234379 209.86.210.235 (Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:32:59 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:32:59 PST Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net X-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:28:48 PST (newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16705 Date: 2001-11-20T05:32:59+00:00 List-Id: Marin David Condic wrote: > > The last time I went informally cruising through anything to do with the > UML, I seem to recall that it lacked any means of representing Ada tasks. > Through interaction diagrams, you kind of had a way of saying how one thread > of control would interact with another, but when it came to representing > something that should be translated to a task, complete with rendesvous, > etc, there didn't seem to be any way of expressing this. I'm not very fond of UML, as it seems you need a large number of diagrams, each of which contributes a couple of bits to the total description. I much prefer something like CAIM, in which a few diagrams each contribute a great deal. It also seems as if UML works best for business applications in C++, so of course there would be no concept of tasking. That said, however, I think a modeling notation should not represent language-specific implementation features. The initial default assumption should be that all objects are active, and that can then be modified as you work towards an implementation. -- Jeff Carter "Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries." Monty Python & the Holy Grail