Re: Ada95 and UML

["Martin Dowie" <martin.dowie@nospam.baesystems.com>]

oops, sorry, I was indeed getting confused with the inclusion of
the Ravenscar Profile!

Peter Amey <pna@praxis-cs.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3AD58870.96EB100F@praxis-cs.co.uk...
>
>
> Martin Dowie wrote:
> >
> > v4 of Artisan's Real-Time Studio Pro (out in a couple of months) are
> > supporting
> > Ada code generation from UML in 4 flavours:
> >
> > 1. Ada83
> > 2. SPARK Ada83
> > 3. Ada95
> > 4. SPARK Ada95(? didn't now this was out yet...presumably supporting
> >     Ravenscar)
> >
>
> SPARK 95 has been out for years!  It differs from SPARK 83 primarily in
> support for child packages which map extremely well on to the kind of
> hierarchical state refinement that works so well in SPARK.  We are
> indeed working very hard on SPARK Ravenscar and hope to be able to
> announce something soon along these lines.
>
> As far as the original question is concerned I would be very careful
> with UML -> Ada generation for critical applications using the kinds of
> defaults the tools will come set with.  These tend to create objects on
> the heap and return a pointer to them in a very cavalier fashion which
> can make code verification extremely difficult.  We have had some
> success tailoring tools such as Rose to produce abstract data type,
> object-based code rather than fully-fledged OOP.  The limitations on how
> much of UML can be used are more than offset by the improved ease of
> verification.
>
> Peter