Lofi Dewanto wrote:
This is the link: http://www.dstc.edu.au/pegamento/publications/index.html
see Model Transformation.
Also check out: http://www.metamodel.com
Yes, indeed the QVT for model to model transformation will be the very interesting stuff. But I think, it will take sometime before OMG releases the current spec for QVT with MOF 2.
True, I just wanted to start some discussion about possible uses if we already had it.
Also, the way of AndroMDA, PIM -> Sourcecode without a true PSM, is a pragmatic way, especially if you don't have a good UML tool ;-)
I can't perfectly agree with this. For AndroMDA we actually model a PSM I would say. But actually that's not really important. Beeing able to transform between different models to get differnt levels of abstraction or separate different aspects of your software in different models could be very helpful. No question, we need tools that can make use of this but that's actually we are working for, right :).
-> PIM: the way to document your application model and communicate with your customers. Also known as Domain Concept in ARIS. IMO, this is the most important part. I myself don't see so much value on PSM.
If you think of platform secific, say EJB, and also think of having a standard PSM for EJB one day, this would give you the opportunity of beeing implementation independend (concerning your EJB container in this case). Practical use: your application server xyz has some significant stability problems in the current version - push some button and take another one :) and don't think about it any more. Alright, that sounds like science fiction, but I think that's one good reason to at least think about the possible power of PSM and model transformation in general.
I prefer to have my code directly, instead of seeing UML diagrams with e.g. EJBObject, EJBHome classes, etc. and have to work with them.
Less (or none) transformation between models will surely save time during code generation. This will save a lot of time for developers of huge projects. But concerning thos PSMs, if you really model the PIM, I would think that you should never actualle *see* one of those PSMs as UML. They will be generated during code generation and when generation is finished they just disappear.
One good thing with QVT would be to make transformation from PIM to PIM, for example.
I am not sure what you mean by this kind of transformation, could you provide an example please?
thank you
Cheers Harald
Cheers,
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ Andromda-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/andromda-user
