|
and so presumably endorsed by the Three Amigos, are full of mistakes, inconsistencies, contradictions, and confusing ideas that do not help with designing anything. I think UML is an example of the Emperor’s New Clothes.
Who are the Three Amigos??
The Rational's Three Amigos?
However, if I can make $$$$$$$ that just carate a dream for my "fans", I would like to be the "King".
BTW, if you never walk (or running) in beach/street without cloth, you should try sometime.... (Just remember to hide your face.)
|
|
|
|
|
I won't say UML is rubbish in common. But it is rubbish for me. I have to learn a complete new way of thinking in the diagrams...
In the projects I designed there was no UML whatsoever and these work just as fine as any other project 
And there's another thing why you shouldn't use UML. In C# with the properties n stuff it's of no use any way.
Greetings....
|
|
|
|
|
WillemM wrote:
And there's another thing why you shouldn't use UML. In C# with the properties n stuff it's of no use any way.
Huh? 
--
Futue te et ipsum caballum.
|
|
|
|
|
Properties are actually functions... you don't only set variables with values, but you can also launch events or start functions in your properties....
Last time I used visio UML to make my program, it didn't support this.
Greetings....
|
|
|
|
|
WillemM wrote:
Last time I used visio UML to make my program, it didn't support this.
Yep, I had the same problem.
|
|
|
|
|
We've used UML quite deeply in the past; and have largely discarded it as an encumbrance that doesn't map particularly well to actual software design.
Anybody know if Rational Rose is better these days? That piece must have been the most honking incompetent user interface piece of crud on the planet. Imagine navigating the most cluttered awkward dialog with shifting multi-line tabs to set your most basic cardinality of an association.
And then there are the examples. Weather Station is a fine example of requirement mismatch, arbitrary design and sheer incompetence for what is a *trivial* system. My work on the other hand requires useful tools and techniques to be effective - not obstructive - on actual *difficult* problems.
Ah well, it will all be obsolete in 10 years, things are looking good on the Java side and with the Eclipse extensible open-source IDE, there's a lot of power going to come out of this kind of area.
Cheers,
Thomas
|
|
|
|
|
true enough
Greetings....
|
|
|
|
|
I designed the last system I wrote using UML, with Microsoft Visio. Altho it was very good for designing, and really helped me sort out a lot of issues at the design stage, I find Visio very hard to use. I don't think this is Visio itself, but UML tools per se. As an experiment, I designed a minor system on paper, using UML, then wrote the classes with methods shells, Interfaces and properties, but no implementation, and reverse engineered via Visual Studio.Net into UML. I found this to be a much faster process, as I am more of a coder than a graphic tool person. The design process was still the same, I wrote a lot of notes on paper during the design process before writing the classes. I think I would still use this approach on future projects. I know there are tools that exist that sit inside the development environment that will change the UML as the code changes and vise versa. I think these have a lot more potential of adoption.
I also am not particularly keen on the code generated out of Visio. I think it is a tool that has a long way to go.
On a bigger team, where there are architects who don't code, only use modelling tools, I think it would be a lot more successful. On a smaller team like ours, where I need to be architect, build engineer, write unit tests, write documentation etc, I think the overhead means that I would still prefer to create a class without the method implementation, and reverse engineer into UML, than to do it UML to code.
Being in a minority of one, doesn't make you insane
George Orwell
However, in my case it does
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes (in our design docs) and always in our documentation (gen'd by Doxygen).
/ravi
My new year's resolution: 2048 x 1536
Home | Articles | Freeware | Music
ravib@ravib.com
|
|
|
|
|
Only the system designer will use UML, but the rest of the team has to know how to read it. UML is useful and can desribe situations that the english language has a hard time doing.
We use Rational Rose, and follow our specific SDLC.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know, just like I don't know what is "full software life cycle".
These are on the required skill list of my current job (must have, according to the job ad), but I guess they don't matter because I am still getting paid every two weeks without knowing them. I have been with this company for more than 3 years. 
P.S. I lied in my interview to get my job. I suspect the managers and technical leads who were at the interview don't know these things either.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know what UML is either. It used to be "Unified Modeling Language", i.e. a cross between the Booch and OMT notations, but now I think it has become to mean the use OO tools like Rational Rose (even though Rational Rose allows you to use all three notations)
|
|
|
|
|
You're right. UML, or Unified Modeling Language, is just a way to communicate ideas to other software development personnel. Whether it be top-down (architects-designers-developers), bottom-up (developers-designers-architect), or just from person to person within the same role, UML is meant to convey software design in a visual manner.
UML can be used without any tools. Honeslty, that was part of the original intent - to have a "language" so easy to use, that you could write it on a piece of paper. Therefore, no tools are required. The tools just help make UML modeling easier.
Michael Flanakin
Web Log
|
|
|
|
|
I've always wanted to learn it. Never really had the time.
So any recommendations on good books for learning UML. (For a 15+ year C/C++ developer)
Michael
But you know when the truth is told,
That you can get what you want or you can just get old,
Your're going to kick off before you even get halfway through.
When will you realise... Vienna waits for you? - "The Stranger," Billy Joel
|
|
|
|
|
There are tons of online docs, check out Rational's site at http://www.ibm.com
Also Java Software Solutions is a basic intro nook that covers general UML.
I don't know of any one person who uses all the possible diagrams that can be displayed in UML.
|
|
|
|
|
I've read up on UML with the intention to learn it, but it's like everything: if you don't use it, you lose it... especially if it's something as tedious like UML.
Regards,
Alvaro
Give a man a fish, he owes you one fish. Teach a man to fish, you give up your monopoly on fisheries.
|
|
|
|
|
You won't need a book, Michael. Check out this downloadable tutorial.
/ravi
My new year's resolution: 2048 x 1536
Home | Articles | Freeware | Music
ravib@ravib.com
|
|
|
|
|
Michael P Butler wrote:
So any recommendations on good books for learning UML. (For a 15+ year C/C++ developer)
As a good 15+ year C/C++ developer, you don't need to waste your time on something as useless as UML, unless you are already in a management position and need to deal with clueless bosses and customers. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
I design my code using a mixture of OOD techniques that are loosly based on Booch and OMT, does that count?
|
|
|
|
|
We use Rational Rose extensively for software design. Clients require the design before hand what we are up to so they will prefer a visual design rather than more technical design.
Any ways some one down the forum said they use Drawing board for Design. We also do that when we are in the initial stages of the design.. but Rational rose or softcopy of the design is considered as official.
MSN Messenger.
prakashnadar@msn.com
|
|
|
|
|
I use Poseidon for UML (CE) from time-to-time, but generally only for Seq. Dia. or Use Case Studies for our QA group, so they can better understand the work-flow. Currently, as a company, we do not have nor do we collectively use a UML tool.
D.
|
|
|
|
|
As one of the (currently) 3 votes for "no", i'm curious about the reasons given by those voting otherwise - what do you feel it gains you? What problems are best tackled with UML ready at hand, and how has using it improved things over the tools you used previously?
How do you move in a world of fog, That's always changing things?
Makes me wish that i could be a dog, When i see the price that you pay.
|
|
|
|
|
Shog9 wrote:
the tools you used previously
That's just it, we didn't use *any* tools previously. I can't compare UML to other tools out there... maybe there are others that work just as well. But we needed a design tool, and UML seems to work fine.
Remember, even if you win the rat race, you're still a rat.
|
|
|
|
|
I somewhat use UML: use-case diagrams, class diagrams and activity diagrams. It is pretty limited, since some design concepts are practically impossible to describe with UML syntax (especially generic libraries), but for "classic" OO design it can be useful.
What really bothers me is that I spend too much time trying to fit all UML elements on a screen - it just distracts me from the design. Also, I don't like any UML software I've tried so far (Visio, Rational Rose) and often end up drawing the diagrams on a sheet of paper or a whiteboard.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
