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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,cf8a34cc14497c2c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-02-05 21:47:14 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.tele.dk!193.251.151.101!opentransit.net!jussieu.fr!enst!enst.fr!not-for-mail From: Koni Buhrer Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Rational Edge Design Papers Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 23:45:59 -0600 Organization: Rational Software Sender: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org Message-ID: References: <3A664BF3.2FCB8C17@PublicPropertySoftware.com> <3A672744.2E7651C3@earthlink.net> <3A674222.8895E25F@PublicPropertySoftware.com> <3A68404A.4B3BF902@earthlink.net> <3A690572.51F7C94D@easystreet.com> <3A7362F5.11E74D20@rational.com> Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 981438428 79541 137.194.161.2 (6 Feb 2001 05:47:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 05:47:08 +0000 (UTC) To: "comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org" Return-Path: X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail<->news gateway List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:4960 Date: 2001-02-05T23:45:59-06:00 Hans-Olof Danielsson wrote: > > "Koni Buhrer" wrote: > > > .... > > One of the benefits of the universal design pattern is that it exposes > > the architecturally complex issues at the highest level. > > .... > > > Appreciate your comment. > > One comment is that a software architecture should be analysable regarding > qualities such as performance, dependability, security and > modifiability/interoperability making it possibly to determine the > attributes/value-pairs of an architecture to find out its suitability for > its purpose. > > And a question is; how and how well an architecture designed with the > universial design pattern supports analysis of the mentioned qualities? > > Hans-Olof The universal design pattern has a slightly different goal. In theory, using the universal design pattern should GUARANTEE that a software design has a (reasonably) high level of quality across all quality factors. Much like applying a residential construction code guarantees that a house is safe. Of course, that does not guarantee that a quality (say performance) is in fact high enough for a specific purpose. Neither does the universal design pattern guarantee that a software system meets any other specific requirements. However - and this is what I was referring to in the initial quotation above - the universal design pattern makes software designs highly transparent. Transparency is after all a quality. And therefore, I believe the universal design pattern generally does support analysis of quality factors. Koni