UML & Jacobson - Help please !
mosh...@hotmail.com
I'm a computer-science student and I'm preparig a work about the
use of OO in software design with a stress on the Jacobson use case
theory and UML.
I don't understand how do Jacobson's theory fits into the UML .
Can anyone help ?
Can you recommend any articles/books/sites about this subject ?
Any help will be highly appritiated .
Thanks
Tal Moshaiov
<mosh...@hotmail.com>
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
mbor...@my-dejanews.com
mosh...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Hello,
> I'm a computer-science student and I'm preparig a work about the
> use of OO in software design with a stress on the Jacobson use case
> theory and UML.
> I don't understand how do Jacobson's theory fits into the UML .
> Can anyone help ?
> Can you recommend any articles/books/sites about this subject ?
> Any help will be highly appritiated .
>
> Thanks
> Tal Moshaiov
> <mosh...@hotmail.com>
>
Hi Tal,
See Jacobson ,Booch, Rumbaugh came together and formed UML as they saw
that their individual theories had much common ground and hence a
unified approach be better for all concerned .
Read (1)"The Unified Modelling Language User Guide" OR
(2)"The Unified Modelling Language Reference manual" OR
(3)"The Unified Software Developement Process"
by
James Rumbaugh
Grady Booch
Ivar Jacobson
Addison Wesley Longman ($ 8.95)
in terms of increasing complexity . I have the first book and it's
excellent
Bye
Marty
Rjbotting
methods and methodologists - HoHoOnlySerious.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once three methodologist tried to define an elephant:
One said it looked like a cloud, the next said it looked
like a tree only upside down,
and the third said it was a suitcase.
And they all lived happily ever after.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.csci.csusb.edu/dick/methods.html
(Apologies in advance)
Richard Botting, CSUSB or DocDick@home
Fatso the Innocent
> I'm a computer-science student and I'm preparig a work about the
> use of OO in software design with a stress on the Jacobson use case
> theory and UML.
ain't no stinking 'theory', it's a very simple thing with a very simple
notation. It is so insignificant in the overall scheme of things, that
you'd do well by concentrating on something more important. Peruse a
thin UML book (I forever forget the author) if you want.
> I don't understand how do Jacobson's theory fits into the UML.
There is no 'Jacobson theory' (unless you're talking about linguistics,
for course <g>.) It's a way to document user/software interaction. Take
it easy, and unless they make you do this, do something else. Study
algorithms, data structures, compiler design, network communications,
operating system design, discrete mathematics, C++, etc. before you
dedicate an hour of your life to "Jacobson theory."
------------------------------------------
len
if you must use email, reply to:
73 662 dot 26 51 at compuserve dot com
thi
> mosh...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > I don't understand how do Jacobson's theory fits into the UML.
>
> There is no 'Jacobson theory' (unless you're talking about linguistics,
> for course <g>.) It's a way to document user/software interaction. Take
> it easy, and unless they make you do this, do something else. Study
> algorithms, data structures, compiler design, network communications,
> operating system design, discrete mathematics, C++, etc. before you
> dedicate an hour of your life to "Jacobson theory."
woah, you were on a nice roll there until you hit C++. :-/
but in general, i agree. to the original poster: read some code, write
some code, read some code that writes some code. but then, go and play
hackysack in the park to understand the significance of structures in
time and space.
want to learn UML? hack geda and implement a UML module!
thi
Fatso the Innocent
> woah, you were on a nice roll there until you hit C++. :-/
all these discrete mathematics w/o it? You wouldn't put uml before a
language, would you?
thi
> Why? I gotta know at least one language too <g>. How are you gonna use
> all these discrete mathematics w/o it? You wouldn't put uml before a
> language, would you?
uml is a 2d subset of language, not a full language, so no i wouldn't
put it before a language. but there are other languages i would put
before c++. since i'm not interested in a language war breaking out,
i'll just say Never Mind at this point and go back to sleep. :->
thi
Alter Ego
> uml is a 2d subset of language, not a full language,
> but there are other languages i would put
> before c++. since i'm not interested in a language
> war breaking out, i'll just say Never Mind
Totally peacfully: what languages do you have in mind? I promise no
hostilities will ensue <g>.
thi
> thi wrote:
> > uml is a 2d subset of language, not a full language,
> UML is a not a language at all, so the point is moot.
i suppose i was using "language" in a loose way.
> > but there are other languages i would put
> > before c++. since i'm not interested in a language
> > war breaking out, i'll just say Never Mind
> Totally peacfully: what languages do you have in mind? I promise no
> hostilities will ensue <g>.
all languages revolving in my mind
seem magically to dynamic-wind;
each associative array penned
gets balanced by an editor friend;
though the LOCs are meager,
finished, i resume, more eager.
http://www.glug.org/people/ttn/trips/seattle/log-0503-0412.html
thi
Alter Ego
> all languages revolving in my mind
> seem magically to dynamic-wind;
> http://www.glug.org/people/ttn/trips/seattle/log-0503-0412.html
Oh, I'm glad I'm not the only mental case around <g>. Keep it up, buddy!
We shall prevail.
John Krogstie
mosh...@hotmail.com skrev i meldingen <7ian1a$bib$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>Hello,
> I'm a computer-science student and I'm preparig a work about the
>use of OO in software design with a stress on the Jacobson use case
>theory and UML.
> Can anyone help ?
Hi, as the other posters indicated, Use Cases is not all that complicated.
Briefly it is zero-level DFD, to be used for specification work (not
design). It is not really an OO-technique at all, thus the problem to have
it fit with the more (purer) object-oriented design notations of UML.
> Can you recommend any articles/books/sites about this subject ?
> Any help will be highly appritiated .
>
> Thanks
> Tal Moshaiov
> <mosh...@hotmail.com>
>
Why not download the UML 1.3. notation and semantics from OMG (also
available from Rational Rose's web-site) ?
(and then look upon this together with the original book by Jacobson on Use
Cases)
You should neither be discouraged, there is a lot of people in industry
which are struggeling with the use of UML.
>
>--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
>---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
John Krogstie
Rolf Schumacher
All genius things are simple.
The steps are easy:
1. Use cases give you an environment to break up the functionallity of
a system, tells you who cares ( no dataflow! ) and forces you to
explain what the functional parts of system should do.
2. Explain each use case with examples. E.g. take sequence diagrams
for this purpose. Examples are very easy to discuss with potential
users. Structure (in SA) is much harder to agree upon.
To give examples you have to introduce objects in your examples that
interact .
Stop here! Take a break. By reaching this point you have interact with
some sort of customer who thinks about an active system - a software
system - to be built. Now you profession is requested.
3. You have to find similarities in the objects and the class of
objects you are able to implement. In the expamles put a class to each
object.
This is the start point of bridging from user needs to a
softwaresystem. No myth in there.
And - what some software artists and underground worker dislike -
everything is open, connected and understandable even to non software
professionals ( those who will pay you ).
When reading the original literature you may find a lot of words for
simple things. That's the case. Read fast and think about it. Rational
has to make it important. They have to sell something.
However, it's genius. We, all software professionals, need a language
to talk to each other and to the non software world. As the architects
do with their drawings for centuries now. Even such simple things -
how to view a system - have to be written somewhere.
And prior to coding everything in C++ or Java.
Rolf
p.s. Believe me, this openess is as frightening to some SE
professionals as Linux is to Bill Gates.
On Mon, 24 May 1999 05:11:07 GMT, mosh...@hotmail.com wrote:
>Hello,
> I'm a computer-science student and I'm preparig a work about the
>use of OO in software design with a stress on the Jacobson use case
>theory and UML.
> I don't understand how do Jacobson's theory fits into the UML .
> Can anyone help ?
> Can you recommend any articles/books/sites about this subject ?
> Any help will be highly appritiated .
>
> Thanks
> Tal Moshaiov
> <mosh...@hotmail.com>
>
>