RE: [Sheflug] Re: Topic for a Meeting

["Steve Vernon" <xxxxx [at] xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I never said it was a failing of UML. I said it was a failing of the
Discovery Process.

I think although perhaps not UML when I design programs I do draw a few
boxes and label them with links, and then if I get stuck I look at
design patterns which are a good way to think round a problem.

Steve
XX

|-----Original Message-----
|From: shef-lug-admin [at] list.sheflug.org.uk 
|[mailto:shef-lug-admin [at] list.sheflug.org.uk] On Behalf Of Craig Andrews
|Sent: 11 July 2002 08:51
|To: shef-lug [at] list.sheflug.org.uk
|Subject: Re: [Sheflug] Re: Topic for a Meeting
|
|
|On Wednesday 10 July 2002 20:26, you exclaimed:
|> But in practice you end up messing around to follow the 
|rules such as 
|> classes should be small. Ok perhaps they should be but you start to 
|> loose the business logic and then forget about documentation 
|etc. Also 
|> some of the later steps of the Discovery Process seems to be missing 
|> explanations and reasons.
|
|This isn't a failing of UML because, as Will pointed out, it 
|is purely a 
|notation, not a process. Any failing of the project planning, 
|design, or 
|implementation is a problem of the methodologies being used, 
|not the language 
|used to describe it. I could blame my lack of understanding of 
|the finer 
|points of thermodynamics on the English language, because it 
|hasn't been used 
|to adequately explain it to me :)
|
|That's one reason I suggested an OSS/Free Software project 
|management talk, 
|rather than purely UML.
|
|Craig 
|___________________________________________________________________
|
|Sheffield Linux User's Group - http://www.sheflug.co.uk/mailfaq.html
|
|  GNU the choice of a complete generation.
|

___________________________________________________________________

Sheffield Linux User's Group -
http://www.sheflug.co.uk/mailfaq.html

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.