> 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.