Re: Comparison : Ada and UML (comparison… indeed)

[Matteo Bordin <matteo.bordin@gmail.com>]

On Nov 11, 8:40 am, "J-P. Rosen" <ro...@adalog.fr> wrote:
> Le 10/11/2010 22:43, Vinzent Hoefler a écrit :> On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:31:06 +0100, Simon Wright <si...@pushface.org>
> > wrote:
>
> >> Would a HOOD model of an aircraft with 4 engines have one HOOD object
> >> for each engine?
>
> > If they are of the same type (which I suppose they would be), they
> > would become four instantiations of a "Generic_Engine", I'd say.
>
> > So, yes, there will be one HOOD object for each engine.
>
> 1) In HOOD 3.1, yes. There was support for generics and similar objects,
> unfortunately called "classes". This comes from the fact that HOOD
> started from an abstract state machines approach.
>
> 2) HOOD 4 added support for abstract data types and classes (with
> inheritance).

Do you mean that the HOOD semantics says that:
- HOOD active objects (like an "Engine") may have multiple instancies
and
- if you modify the prototype instance (to use a UML term: the class)
of "Engine", then all of its instancies are modified accordingly
?

I think this is what Simon is asking.