TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Steven Deller <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Steven Deller <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 12 Oct 1999 12:03:12 -0400
text/plain (35 lines)
On Sunday, October 10, 1999 3:59 PM, Tom Moran [SMTP:[log in to unmask]] wrote:
> The current (Oct 99) issue of Communications of the ACM has an
> article "UMLoquent Expression of AWACS Software Design" in which
> the authors talk about UML <-> Ada and say things like "There is
> currently no known means ..."  and "We know of no means..."
> about generating Ada from UML or UML from Ada.  The fact the
> authors know "no means" may reflect their own limitations, but
> will probably be taken by readers to mean "Ada and UML don't work
> together".  Could those who know this subject please comment.

Having just read the article, I would summarize the author's statements as
"The current UML expression form and the current mapping between Ada and UML
are insufficient to express the types of constructions and software
engineering approaches that we want to use in our program."

It is also fair to say that the supplier of their modeling and mapping tools
is aware of those shortcomings and is working to improve the situation.

Perhaps there should be a response in the Communications, but not to
castigate the authors.  The response could simply state that the "UML is
inadequate to fully express the rich software engineering expressiveness of
Ada, and so extensions and expressions outside of UML are being investigated
to provide  complete Ada 95/UML forward and reverse engineering."



Steven Deller, Apex Ada Marketing
[log in to unmask], (410) 757 6924
Rational Software Corporation,
For user email groups, check