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-Thread: 103376,b438e75ce5e32099 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit From: Jacob Sparre Andersen Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Generating Ada from UML on Linux Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 08:40:18 +0200 Organization: Jacob's private Usenet server Message-ID: <87r6zjvmzx.fsf@nbi.dk> References: <87ejvs6fj6.fsf@nbi.dk> <20060809130000.J84175@docenti.ing.unipi.it> NNTP-Posting-Host: 0x5552efa6.adsl.cybercity.dk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: jacob-sparre.dk 1155537619 3595 85.82.239.166 (14 Aug 2006 06:40:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: sparre@jacob-sparre.dk NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 06:40:19 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:Nuhecn8Vuhi9QYN8qDeYNSp68Mc= Path: g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!news.germany.com!newsfeed.kamp.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!81.174.50.156.MISMATCH!redpower.x-privat.org!news.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!not-for-mail Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6196 Date: 2006-08-14T08:40:18+02:00 List-Id: 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.