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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,f23f789345652e5b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!p2g2000prn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Matteo Bordin Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Users of the BON notation among Ada users ? Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:10:43 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <0e67d712-c126-478f-b1bc-d2d22ae66952@w1g2000prm.googlegroups.com> <25hhkg.t4r.ln@hunter.axlog.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: 212.99.106.163 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1231837843 6908 127.0.0.1 (13 Jan 2009 09:10:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:10:43 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: p2g2000prn.googlegroups.com; posting-host=212.99.106.163; posting-account=0fK-ZgoAAACswzEJSZ3LA9AZ4FnRU7mX User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.5) Gecko/2008120122 Firefox/3.0.5,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4223 Date: 2009-01-13T01:10:43-08:00 List-Id: On Jan 13, 8:50=A0am, Jean-Pierre Rosen wrote: > Martyn Pike a =E9crit : > > > I have often wondered why HOOD and HRT-HOOD have not remained popular > > within the Ada community. =A0Or perhaps they have - anyone care to comm= ent ? > Because, unlike UML, they are not simply notations, but true design > *methods*. They drive the design process through a precise engineering > methodology. This "hampers the creativity" of those who want to write > software as they please, and not as they are told to. > > In the old times, people were proud of having obscure code with a > comment saying "this is impossible to understand, but don't worry, it > works". Nowadays, people are proud of covering the walls of their office > with the most complicated class diagram possible. HOOD is intended to > limit the complexity one has to deal with. How can you prove you are the > big guy with such a method? > > Hmmm, I think I could go on like this forever ;-) Because, as a metter of fact, UML is the only standardized 4GL. Or because back in the days of HOOD, model-driven engineering was basically moving boxes around and generate skeletons. When it became evident that you wanted to do more with your models (i.e. analysis, model simulation, model coverage, etc.) and that the maintenance of such tools would have required wide use to be economically feasible, people started looking for tools which could evolve and be supported over time (or whose language was taught at Universities etc.). In addition, (HRT-)HOOD, in my opinion lacked a fully specific execution semantics which could trascend from the way code is generated - something that other languages like SCADE have and that UML (in its several flavours like SysML/MARTE) desperately tries to have without (always) succeding. For the same reason I dislike Ada profiles as the semantics of a model should be given by the modeling language itself (the metamodel) rather than by knowing in advance how you generate code. Then we can discuss which programming language can better preserve the model semantics at lower abstraction levels - and in this case Ada is clearly better than C or Java on several aspects. For what regards enforcing a precise methodology through UML, just enforce a modeling standard (exactly like you enforce a coding standard), and you are done. As a side note, UML reprised (sadly several years later) some good ideas of HOOD, for example hiearchical decomposition and delegation, making de facto feasible to design of HOOD-like models in UML (Artisan indeed sponsored this to let its tools be used for Eurofighter). > -- > --------------------------------------------------------- > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 J-P. Rosen (ro...@adalog.fr) > Visit Adalog's web site athttp://www.adalog.fr