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: 2001-11-21 01:34:41 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: byhoe@greenlime.com (Adrian Hoe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: UML & Ada
Date: 21 Nov 2001 01:34:41 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <9ff447f2.0111210134.1c91d308@posting.google.com>
References: <9tc0qk$cee$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3BF9EB02.D9946B9B@acm.org>
 <slrn9vk9f4.3qs.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <3BFB1023.8E7151F3@acm.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 210.186.172.38
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1006335281 28316 127.0.0.1 (21 Nov 2001 09:34:41
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 21 Nov 2001 09:34:41 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16775
Date: 2001-11-21T09:34:41+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Jeffrey Carter <jrcarter@acm.org> wrote in message news:<3BFB1023.8E7151F3@acm.org>...
> Preben Randhol wrote:
> > 
> > I have been looking a bit on OMT as it is used in an OOP text book I
> > bought. Does anybody know how good OMT is? I also found a page for
> > mapping from OMT associations to Ada:
> 
> OMT is one of the three OOA techniques that merged to form UML.


UML := OMT + Booch + Jacobson;

I have been using OMT for some time and I just began to learn and use
UML. As personal taste, I prefer OMT to UML as someone posted in this
thread "UML takes a big diagram to represent design in bits....".

I still have not fully discovered why UML is a better OO methodology.
Anyone?

                                                    -- Adrian Hoe