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
*
*************************************************************************
