Oh, I completely agree. UML is grotesque, but it is an accepted standard that a lot of tools use. Funny how often those two things go together. ;)
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Peter Bell <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Feb 10, 2009, at 2:02 PM, Barney Boisvert wrote: > >> In the real world, the model is often expressed in UML > > Only in Dante's sixth circle of hell :-) Seriously, I think the OMG is > the main reason Domain Specific Modeling hasn't taken off. Go to any > serious platform agnostic DSM conference (DSM forum at ooPSLA, Code > Gen in Cambridge England, MoDELs, etc) and Tony Clark (or one of his > friends) is the guy looking defensive, sitting in the corner and > trying to explain to anyone who listens that with stereotypes you can > do anything in UML (missing the point that you can also plant > geraniums with a fork lift truck, some hydraulics and a little > ingenuity - because something is possible doesn't mean it's optimal!) > > Heck I've heard it proposed that the only reason for the recent > popularity of M2M transformations is the hideous structure of the > models spat out by all of the UML tooling :-) > > Best Wishes, > Peter > > > > > > > -- Barney Boisvert [email protected] http://www.barneyb.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFCDev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfcdev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
