Win a copy of Testing JavaScript Applications this week in the HTML Pages with CSS and JavaScript forum!
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Bear Bibeault
  • Ron McLeod
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Paul Clapham
Sheriffs:
  • Tim Cooke
  • Liutauras Vilda
  • Junilu Lacar
Saloon Keepers:
  • Tim Moores
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Tim Holloway
  • fred rosenberger
  • salvin francis
Bartenders:
  • Piet Souris
  • Frits Walraven
  • Carey Brown

Carry OOAD artifacts forward into implementation

 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 103
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
This is a question from pre-assessment exam:
Which of the following are true about implementing a system based on existing OOAD assets? [3 correct answers]
a) Due to constraints introduced by the target language, such as C++, Smalltalk, or Java, as well as physical packaging, the OO analysis model does not carry forward into detailed design and implementation.
b) The classes, methods, attributes, and relationships identified during the OO analysis carry forward into detailed design and implementation.
c) The OO analysis model is usually refactored later in the project.
d) The classes from the OO analysis are expanded to add private methods and collaborations with helper classes.
My answers: bcd
I have a question about a though. If a is changed slightly to:
"Due to constraints introduced by the target language, such as C++, Smalltalk, or Java, as well as physical packaging, not all OO analysis artifacts are carried forward into detailed design and implementation. "
would this be right?
Thanks!
 
Sheriff
Posts: 15815
264
Mac Android IntelliJ IDE Eclipse IDE Spring Debian Java Ubuntu Linux
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Theoretically, analysis documents would be devoid of implementation details, focusing only on what needs to be done rather than how. Thus, you should be able to carry all of your analysis documents forward to design and implementation.
Choice of implementation language and hardware platform are more of a design decision. In practice, however, it is difficult to separate these decisions from analysis mainly because the target platform/language has already been predetermined.
Junilu
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1157
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi,
I donot see the use of programming languages like C++,Smalltalk or Java in the Analysis stage.Analysis is more about understanding the system than emphasizing on implementation details.
Having said that, at times we have to identify risks that is not explicit (or the developers tend to overlook in the design stage).In that case, it is better to "prototype" the concepts with programming languages mentioned above.However, this only helps to understand the problem domain, and in no way adds constraints to design and implementation.
Thus a is incorrect.Would lean towards b, c, and d.
Hope this helps,
Sandeep
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 142
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
b is correct. It's a bit missleading to say that methods found in analysis are carried forward, because their are no methods in analysis. But, their are system events which become methods and they are identified in analysis. The answer a) would make more sense if the answered stated:
Due to constraints introduced by the target language, such as VISUAL BASIC, as well as physical packaging, the OO analysis model does not carry forward into detailed design and implementation.
------------------
David Roberts - SCJP2,MCP
 
Don't get me started about those stupid light bulbs.
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic