Re: Ada95 and UML

["Pat Rogers" <progers@classwide.com>]

"Joe Simon" <jb.simon@lmco.com> wrote in message
news:9b1q2v$s6j4@cui1.lmms.lmco.com...
> we are currently working on defining standards for doing OO development
> using UML with Ada 95 as the target implementation language. We are
looking
> at the broad scope and we will then concentrate on real-time embedded and
> safettyy critical projects (i.e. are there any UML type constructs that we
> want to avoid for RT - Safety Critical).

That will be interesting.  Are you going to make the conclusions public?

> I am attempting to acertain what the implications are in using UML with
> Ada95 (The UML development tool we are using as of now is Telelogic Tau,
it
> generates each object as a separate package with only one type, making it
> difficult to use Ada the way we are used to).

There's no "rule" per se, but that is what I would consider the normal
default.  Certainly one will have ancillary types in the same package, but
they would be in support of the "primary" abstraction represented by the UML
object.  Occasionally one will want to have multiple tagged types in the
same package -- that is indeed an advantage over class-oriented languages
:-) -- but more typically not.  Somethimes that will happen because they are
directly related as one abstraction, and sometimes simply because one is
derived from another in the same package.

Ada is founded on the concept of Abstract Data Types, including the OOP
facilities.  A design that places multiple *unrelated* tagged types in the
same package is contrary to that concept.

> Any thoughts on this subject would be greatly appreciated.

Just IMHO.

---
Patrick Rogers                       Consulting and Training in:
http://www.classwide.com        Real-Time/OO Languages
progers@classwide.com          Hard Deadline Schedulability Analysis
(281)648-3165                          Software Fault Tolerance