The disconnect with UML (etc) based development
Matt Croyden cites Ara Abrahamian on visual development in this post:
This Visually Explicit Programming thread is so interesting.Imho the biggest problem of UML and MDA-based software development is that, well, the code isn't even close to what you've diagrammed! I mean take a look at buildings around you. It's easy to map what the architect drew on his board to the real tangible building. With UML the diagrams are something the designer guy draws and understands but the real program has very little resemblance to it! The designer prefers to speak a more engineering-oriented language, UML, while the masons (developers) don't like or understand it because they have to build the damn building and the architecture they are given by the modeling guy is so different from what they build. They speak two different languages. That said there is value in a engineering-oriented bureaucratic approach too, after all the civilization is built by architects rather than masons, right? So fix the gap otherwise just shut up and don't preach it :-)
That matches every encounter I've ever had with modeling tool driven development. Worse, some team members tend to become mesmerized by the design tools, and get overly focused on things like the placement of boxes in the diagrams....
Comments
re: UML and development
[Mark Watson] April 25, 2003 11:47:07.243
I agree that UML diagrams that do not match up with source code are not so valuable. However, I use a tool that allows "round trip" editing of code and diagrams which solves this problem nicely. On the other hand, I really only find a few types of diagrams to be useful enough actually use: 1. Use case diagrams - the best way to sync up with customer expectations and understand basic requirements (note: just hand written 3x5 cards also work for this :-) 2. top level only class diagrams - if they can be generated automatically, they are useful for reference. If early stage diagrams can be used to generate code, then the effort is worthwhile 3. Object interaction diagrams - the best way to get a grip on time sequenced interaction between objects. These are easy (fast) to produce and I find them useful. -Mark PS. I wrote a book on UML years ago, so I may be a little biased :-)
Excellent Obvervation, Wrong Attribution
[Matt Croydon] April 25, 2003 11:55:54.027
I agree wholeheartedly. However, Ara Abrahamian is the blogger that you quoted, and not myelf. I think that UML can have a place in the world as long as you don't take it too seriously. --Matt
Updated the Post...
[James Robertson] April 25, 2003 13:01:09.916
I updated the post after Matt pointed out the correct citation
Paper Trail of UML
[Michael Lucas-Smith] April 25, 2003 20:03:10.559
At work we find UML very useful - on the white board, where it can be wiped off once we've had enough of it. Once you walk into a building you don't look at the building plans to go from room to room, you look around the building and navigate yourself - welcome to the concept of the Smalltalk browser.