> From: Bruce Hennessy <[log in to unmask]>
> if you are trying to 'reverse engineer' an existing system that is
> not OO designed, in order to continue to 'maintain' that system,
> i.e. fairly significant changes keep coming in - you could run into
> roadblocks when trying to represent that system in UML. For example
> class diagrams will be tough to produce when the Ada constructs
> don't fit nicely into classes.
As an example, consider generics .. Rose has no way of representing
type T is private;
with function "=" (L, R : T) return Boolean is <>;
let alone signature packages.
Lots and lots of "notes"!
We design for a code generator, so the application doesn't need much
of UML. However, I agree it can be tricky trying to model the way the
framework fits together, the saving grace there is that it "onlY"
needs to be understandable by people.