Yep, I agree, (see below) and I am getting a little less rusty as the
conversation evolves.
As much as I realize that I am rehashing a lot of the basics of UML here,
please indulge the
next questions with regard to Rose.
Aggregation: Shouldn't an Aggregate class that contains (by value) another
class, have visibility to those
operations that are public? I mean for example if I have
Class A = Motor
Attributes = Engine State
Operation = Start_Motor, Stop_Motor
and I have an aggrete by value class
Class B = Car
Attributes = Motion_State, Speed, Location
Operations = Turn, Modify_Speed
shouldnt a client of car, say
Class C = Driver
have access to the Start_Motor Operation provided by Motor class via the Car
class?
And in Rose specifiaclly why can't I hide the inner details in a sequence
diagram,
having my Driver simply communicate to Car with the Start_Motor operation
instead of
having the driver have to know that the Car is also going to make a call to
Engine.Start_Motor ?
any opinions, help would be appreciated and I am sure will cause me to take
Class.My_Hand and
have it use operation Hit_My_Forehead returning value "Doh!"
thanks
ashley raiteri
boeing awacs sw
> hiho,
>
> This whole "the public/protected/private does not properly match my concrete
> language needs" is definitely a real UML issue. UML clearly states in its
> specification the concepts of public/protected/private as understood by most
> object-oriented professionals. But this misses concepts such as package
> visibility in Java and the Ada issues you describe.
>
> BTW, proper UML does not have the "Implementation" option. That is old
> Booch metamodel stuff still supported by Rose.
>
> ----- b
>
> --
> Brian G. Lyons
> Number Six Software - Voted Rational's Best Complementary Service Provider
> 1655 North Fort Myer Drive, Suite 1100
> Arlington, VA 22209-3196
> http://www.numbersix.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of EXT-Raiteri, Ashley L
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 3:47 PM
> To: List - Rose Forum; 'Ma Ding-CDM087'
> Cc: Clements, Allan P; Harbaugh, John S
> Subject: RE: (ROSE) Subclasses and Visible Inherited
> Operations/Attributes
>
>
>
> Ding, you are correct, at least according to the Boggs UMLw/Rose book, but
> unfortunately the Documentation (at least the online HELP) included with
> rose says that
> protected and private export control types for attributes and operations are
> identical and indicate that the
> visibility for such operations/attributes are for nested classes, friends or
> the class itself.
>
> Unfortunately, ADA doesnt support this notion that a "protected"
> operation/attribute respresents those
> qualities that should be inherited by a sublass, in fact, there is a
> distinct difference between protected and
> private in ADA95, which with the lmited and tagged modifiers allow ada95 to
> provide an Object Oriented
> development strategy which is far more friendly to the world of concurrency
> than C++.
> Unfortunately I don't fully understand the interaction of these keywords,
> and to the extent that I do understand them
> there is no direct 1-1 mapping of the Ada concepts to the Rose/UML concepts.
>
> But, i guess my "problem" as it is, is solved, it is my "understanding" of
> the solution that still leaves me feeling
> a little unfulfilled. :)
> regards
> ashley raiteri
> boeing awacs sw
>
>
>
> >>Private operations/attributes are not supposed to be inherited. I think
> what you really want are "PROTECTED" operations/attributes, >>which are only
> visible to subclasses.
> >>- Ding
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: EXT-Raiteri, Ashley L [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 1:41 PM
> > To: List - Rose Forum>
> > Subject: RE: (ROSE) Subclasses and Visible Inherited
> > Operations/Attributes
> >
> >
> >
> > > In reply to my query below,
> > >
> > > > When creating a subclass from an abstract base class,
> > > > I cannot seem to get the operations and attributes of
> > > > the parent class to become visible on the
> > > > specification of the subclass.
> > > > its a question of HOW to get the operations and
> > > > attributes of the parent to show up as inherited
> > > > operations/attributes in the
> > > > sublcass specification.
> > >
> > > Anthony had this to say:
> > >
> > > > ...in the more recent releases,
> > > > you see the operations in the specification
> > > > Rose does know these elements are inherited
> > > > for example: drag the subclass into a
> > > > sequence diagram and the inherited operations
> > > > are on the selection list
> > > > **(normal visibility rules apply -
> > > > so you won't see private superclass operations
> > > in the subclass)**
> > >
> > > This is exactly my problem. I neglected to mention in the first email,
> if the operations
> > > and attributes are set to public instead of private, then the operations
> and attributes ARE visible on my
> > > subclasses's properties tab.
> > > But the understanding I had was that PRIVATE operations and attributes
> SHOULD be inherited, only the
> > > IMPLEMENTATION operations and attributes should be SO private that only
> the superclass has visibility to them.
> > > And the PROTECTED ones can be 'seen/used' by FRIENDS (which is not an
> ADA concept).
> > >
> > > So if I make the type of the operations PUBLIC, then the inherit seems
> to work, but that isn't really what I want is it?
> > > I want the operations/attributes to be PRIVATE and to be inherited.
> > >
> > > What am I missing here?
> > >
> > >
> > regards,
> > ashley raiteri
> > boeing awacs sw
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ************************************************************************
> > * Rose Forum is a public venue for ideas and discussions.
> > * For technical support, visit http://www.rational.com/support
> > *
> > * Admin.Subscription Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > * Archive of messages:
> http://www.rational.com/products/rose/usergroups/rose_forum.jtmpl
> > * Other Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > *
> > * To unsubscribe from the list, please send email
> > *
> > * To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > * Subject:<BLANK>
> > * Body: unsubscribe rose_forum
> > *
> > *************************************************************************>
> >
> ************************************************************************
> * Rose Forum is a public venue for ideas and discussions.
> * For technical support, visit http://www.rational.com/support
> *
> * Admin.Subscription Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> * Archive of messages:
> http://www.rational.com/products/rose/usergroups/rose_forum.jtmpl
> * Other Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *
> * To unsubscribe from the list, please send email
> *
> * To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> * Subject:<BLANK>
> * Body: unsubscribe rose_forum
> *
> *************************************************************************
>
************************************************************************
* Rose Forum is a public venue for ideas and discussions.
* For technical support, visit http://www.rational.com/support
*
* Admin.Subscription Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Archive of messages:
http://www.rational.com/products/rose/usergroups/rose_forum.jtmpl
* Other Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To unsubscribe from the list, please send email
*
* To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Subject:<BLANK>
* Body: unsubscribe rose_forum
*
*************************************************************************
