Re: Generating Ada from UML on Linux

[Jacob Sparre Andersen <sparre@nbi.dk>]

Stephen Leake wrote:
> Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
>> Colin Paul Gloster wrote:
>>> Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:

>>> "I have to teach a course on software design with UML [..]
>>>
>>> [..]"
>>
>>> Perhaps you should refuse to teach an inadequate modelling
>>> language which is not a formal specification language.
>>
>> Perhaps I should, but initially I am just refusing to teach the
>> students Java.  And they will of course also be explained the
>> limitations of UML.
>>
>> Which formal specification language would you suggest for teaching
>> undergraduate students?
>
> In no sense is UML a "formal specification language"!

Agreed.  I hope I didn't give the impression that I consider UML a
formal specification language.  It was Colin who suggested that I
rather than UML use a formal specification language.

> Ada is a better specification language than UML, if you are looking
> for well-defined execution semantics.

Yes.

> As far as I can tell, the only advantage UML has over Ada is that
> you can write it with a mouse - and personally, I consider that a
> disadvantage :).

Me too.  But it is also an advantage that you easily can get a 2D
visual overview of a UML specification.  I don't know any tools which
can do that for Ada, although I think it may be possible.

> I understand there are good tools for Z (much better than just
> LaTeX), but I have not used them.

I will take a look at them.  I don't think I can switch the course
from UML to Z this year, but maybe I can be ready to do it next year.

Greetings,

Jacob
-- 
Rent-a-Minion Inc. Because good help is so hard to find.