![]()
Their main value is documenting what the use cases are so I don't forget any. I have used use case diagrams but haven't found them very useful as an analysis tool. I use class diagrams all the time to model the static relationships between my classes and sequence diagrams to model complex sequences between objects at runtime. ![]() Taking a step back from that I also focus on just a few types of diagrams. Most of my class methods (operations, in StarUML) simply define the name and scope. Now I enter that information only when it is needed to clarify a relationship or the purpose of a method. That made the diagrams more confusing and created a lot of work trying to keep the classifiers updated. For example, I no longer fill in all inputs and outputs for each method in a class. #CREATE SWIMLANES IN STARUML SOFTWARE#I think the important thing to remember is to avoid the urge to model your software in exquisite detail. #CREATE SWIMLANES IN STARUML CODE#(I assume they're for code generation.) Since I'm only using StarUML for the diagrams I don't bother with any of those properties. Some of them have properties that do not show up on diagrams. Not all of the abilities of each piece provided by StarUML need to be used. ( Here's a link to a good overview of the main diagrams as used by the Rational process, and another link to more in depth documentation.) UML provides very generalized pieces for you to build your software model in a way that makes sense to you. To figure that out you need to look into the various software design processes that use UML and see how they use the different diagrams. How you apply the language to your problem is up to you. #CREATE SWIMLANES IN STARUML HOW TO#The sparse documentation tells you how to do things, but not when or why you would want to do them. It definitely expects that you know what you want to do with UML. I wish it explained more about the concepts of UML. Unfortunately, the reality is that models are generally not interchangeable between tools (yet). In principle a model developed using one tool can be opened in any other tool that meets the same UML standard, since the files are stored in XML-formatted files according to a standard. I haven't worked with UML Modeller so I can't comment on its usability. I really want Sparx Systems and National Instruments to work together to make this a reality for LabVIEW.) UML Modeller supports five of the thirteen UML 2.x diagrams (probably the ones I most use). (EA supports this for other platforms but not LabVIEW. I'm pretty sure Endevo's UML Modeller ( UML Modeller 1.2)-already mentioned-is the only tool that supports LabVIEW code generation from diagrams (class diagrams) and diagram (class diagrams, again) generation from LabVIEW code. (Gasp!)īy the way, you can find lists of UML tools at the OMG's UML page. (SysML, in particular, has so much potential! I think the requirements traceability features need improvement before this can fully take over for a good requirements database tool, though.) In short, EA has become one of my favorite tools. One nice thing is that add-ins (some by third party developers) are inexpensive. Some of these non-core functionalities are more useful than others. I can see why EA has won some significant industry awards and has a pretty large following.ĮA has many additional features that can help with the software development process. The help files are good, there is an active EA user forum (although it's not independent like LAVA) and the Sparx Systems folks are quite helpful on the forum and via technical support. ![]() EA has version control capabilities that work well with Subversion, and EA's design supports sharing packages between models very effectively. #CREATE SWIMLANES IN STARUML FREE#We distribute our models to readers via the free viewer, as HTML, or sometimes in RTFs. It handles the core UML functions quite well. Not only was it about ten times less expensive than the previous tool we had, it turned out to be really usable! It has a generally well-designed interface and I find that I can use it quite efficiently. We knew about Enterprise Architect and switched to it when we heard good things from some colleagues with another organization. The help files didn't even attempt to provide information on common user questions, the product support was poor, and extra modules for the tool were absurdly expensive. I found that UML tool to be very hard to use (admittedly part of it was probably my lack of experience with a UML tool). I initially ended up selecting a tool from the same vendor that made the requirements management tool we use. Most of the free tools at the time did not support the (then-current) 2.0 specification. When I first investigated UML tools about three years ago I looked at a number of tools (certainly not all) that were free to quite expensive. I thought I would add a few details to explain our selection. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |