Re: Users of the BON notation among Ada users ?

[Martyn Pike <emconuk@gmail.com>]

Britt Snodgrass wrote:
> I had never heard of BON before your post.  I doubt I would ever try
> it unless it somehow becomes widely used.
> 
> I have used UML to develop an Ada design, in the context of the
> Rhapsody UML modeling tool from Telelogic.  While this tool is very
> good in most respects, UML models are awkward to use with Ada due to
> terminology differences and the fact that many Ada semantic concepts
> can't be easily expressed within the limits of UML 2.x.  Trying to
> generate good Ada code by tweaking a UML model is a rather inefficient
> way to work.
> 

I am glad you have pointed this out.  I also find this.

> I think UML has some good features, and is useful to support the
> design of an integrated system, including hardware and ASIC aspects.
> To better support Ada software, UML needs a *standard* Ada specific
> "profile" to customise the terminology and extend the semantics (i.e.
> an "AdaML" variant of UML along the lines of the "SysML" variant that
> was developed to support whole system design).
> 
> - Britt

I have often wondered why HOOD and HRT-HOOD have not remained popular 
within the Ada community.  Or perhaps they have - anyone care to comment ?