I've got an OOAD question: True or false? When declaring a public method due to an additional message between classes as part of some system functionality, the OOAD UML assets should be updated to reflect this change. a) true b) false What's your opinion on that? And could anybody tell me which of UML books talks about that?
Avijeet Dash
Ranch Hand
Joined: Jan 21, 2001
Posts: 148
posted
0
I would say False. why would other uml assets (??what does this mean btw) get affected by the change in dependency between 2 classes.
Michal Harezlak
Ranch Hand
Joined: Jul 06, 2000
Posts: 185
posted
0
IMHO: the expected answer is true. The "UML assets" are your documentation, so it would be nice to keep them in sync with the actual code. The key words are "public method", it is probably some major change, so it is worth describing in the UML as opposite to some minor thing when a comment in the code is enough. Regards [This message has been edited by Michal Harezlak (edited April 12, 2001).]
Tim Grandison
Greenhorn
Joined: Mar 09, 2000
Posts: 6
posted
0
I agree the answer should be true. At the very least you would expect your package dependency diagram to be updated.
David Roberts
Ranch Hand
Joined: Nov 03, 2000
Posts: 142
posted
0
I'm guessing true as well. I'm saying this based on Craig Larmans book stating that when designs change in code you should reverse engineer the UML to be ready for your next iteration of analysis and design... I'm not sure specifically what "Assets" means either. I do find this part of the question interesting: "part of some system functionality" As in a requirement?
------------------ David Roberts - SCJP2,MCP
David Roberts - SCJP2,MCP
Avijeet Dash
Ranch Hand
Joined: Jan 21, 2001
Posts: 148
posted
0
Oh yes, I think its true. I was thinking in different orbits when i said False. thanks guys.
P@wan Kumar
Greenhorn
Joined: Jul 04, 2001
Posts: 4
posted
0
I would say True. The UML assets are the documentation. An additional public method means change in the public interface. This should update the UML assets.
Hassan Mumtaz
Greenhorn
Joined: Jul 04, 2001
Posts: 15
posted
0
I think UML assets are "models". At the risk of sounding like a methodologist, I would say that they are "artifacts" (work products) and "documents" is not appropriate terminology. However, this is no oppoptunity to fight or argue as natural languages are imprecise anyway. Q: What's the difference between a methodologist and a terrorist? A: You can negotiate with a terrorist!
Muhammad Asif
Ranch Hand
Joined: Jul 13, 2001
Posts: 201
posted
0
Hi! I think that the answer to this question is true! The reason behind is that in projects normally if a new developer wants to see how you have implemented a certain process he should be able to grasp the complete picture via class diagram or ne other notations to see all the methods instead of browsing thru ur code. The person should be able to see the complete flow by looking at the activity diagrams. And certainly he can only understand the latest implementation only if your UML assets have been constantly kept updated. Hope this helps
Hi, It should be true for a simple reason that we should have backward traceability for all the UML artifacts that we have maintained.If you ever feel, that you donot need to update an artifact to reflect the change then you have to question why that artifact exists in the first place. -- Sandeep
<b>Sandeep</b> <br /> <br /><b>Sun Certified Programmer for Java 2 Platform</b><br /> <br /><b>Oracle Certified Solution Developer - JDeveloper</b><br /><b>-- Oracle JDeveloper Rel. 3.0 - Develop Database Applications with Java </b><br /><b>-- Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with UML</b><br /> <br /><b>Oracle Certified Enterprise Developer - Oracle Internet Platform</b><br /><b>-- Enterprise Connectivity with J2EE </b><br /><b>-- Enterprise Development on the Oracle Internet Platform </b>
0
