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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,4c17e6ae73bd8c51 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8 Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Yannick_Duch=C3=AAne_=28Hibou57?= =?utf-8?Q?=29?= Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada and UML Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 03:18:11 +0200 Organization: Ada @ Home Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: TElOPbDtwZwcMrHuwe+urg.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 User-Agent: Opera Mail/10.61 (Win32) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13903 Date: 2010-09-02T03:18:11+02:00 List-Id: Le Wed, 01 Sep 2010 20:44:09 +0200, Simon Wright a = = =C3=A9crit: > I was going to draft a reply but Matteo has said almost all that I wou= ld > have done. I'd add that > > 1 I wouldn't expect every possible UML construct to be translatable > using this model. A given vendor/toolset might well specify > limitations, presumably as a profile. > > 2 I wouldn't expect to be able to tweak the UML so as to generate any > arbitrary target language (Ada) construct. I did not expected this, nor me. > 3 The converse of 2: I wouldn't expect to be able to represent any > arbitrary target language (Ada) program in UML so as to be able to > regenerate it. What I expect, may be explained with concrete cases. I feel for long source does not came with all value and sometime, the = =E2=80=9Cclever idea=E2=80=9D in something comes at an abstract level wh= ich not any more = clearly visible in a source, even if the source implements this =E2=80=9C= clever = idea=E2=80=9D. Because the =E2=80=9Cclever idea=E2=80=9D is made implici= t and not expressed by the = source whose target is to express concrete implementation. That is why = even a well designed application source can be =E2=80=9Cunreadable=E2=80= =9D. As an example, I have an FTP application written 5 years ago. Not so muc= h = big, 2_000 lines. But I have to rework it, and although there are commen= ts = and the design was clear at the time I wrote it, it seems impossible to = be = sure to clearly understand what I had in mind at the time. I have anothe= r = web application, 70_000 lines, which is clear to me for the time, as I = oftenly come back to it... but will this always be like this ? I am afra= id = if I ever switch to something else for a long time or want a later date = to = collaborate with any somebody, things gonna be wrong. Structuration, god entity naming, etc, are nice things, but this is simp= ly = not enough. And what if I ever want to re-implement these things in another language= ? = (one is C, the other is Pascal and JS) A direct translation to Ada (whic= h = I plan for the future) would surely turn into many errors every where. I also had some other similar though about UI design. This is these topics I have in mind. I am not seeking for another way to= = write Ada with something else than Ada. May be we agree in some points and I did express it the good way. As some ones says : you do not see the face on a printed image looking a= t = the little colored dots the raster printer drawn on the paper. And this = is = sadly true even with tiny pictures (it is frightening to think something= = as simple a 2_000 lines application can become so much unclear... and wh= at = about bigger things...). But while I feel this may help, I still have some doubt about the UML = approach : what about things which are not design or architecture and = which are rather algorithmic ? Is UML well suited to express algorithm i= n = an abstract manner ? In that area, I had a recent look at (S)ML, but sti= ll = do not have a clear though (there are state machines in UML, I known, bu= t = this is not enough, and an algorithm too may have multiple = implementations, so a more abstract view than a particular implementatio= n = could be welcome too). Still in this area, I also explored and tested other techniques, but I'm= = afraid I would become boring... (at least I have a better picture of the= = subject than the one I had, say, 3 years ago) Have a nice day all -- = =E2=80=9CDual licensing is the Perl's way to disinfect the GNU General P= ublic = Virus!=E2=80=9D (anonymous)