Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Roman Susi wrote: Out of curiosity, how do I draw functions outside classes with UML? How module could be drawn in this case? I just create a (UML) class for modules. After all a Python module can be seen as a class definition for a singleton which is instantiated at import time. Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
Ravi Teja wrote:
(snip)
And probably Python is too dynamic for UML. That is another reason
rountrip tools aren't there.
As you probably already know, UML diagrams are structural and
behavioural (plus interactional with 2.0). Round trip tools only model
structural diagrams. Python is dynamic but only once the program starts
executing :-). Even though Python classes can change, they do so only
at runtime
Well, you can have a lot of things happening during the import stage. Is
this 'runtime' or not ?-)
And you can actually *create* (not 'change') classes at runtime too.
So dynamism of Python should not be as
much of an issue.
Not so sure about this.
--
bruno desthuilliers
python -c print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
p in '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.split('@')])
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
Philippe Martin wrote:
meta please don't top-post - corrected/meta
bruno at modulix wrote:
Philippe Martin wrote:
Roman Susi wrote:
(snip)
More theoretical question is if I create classes on the fly, how UML can
reflect that?
You mean objects I think:
Yes : class objects !-)
Python's classes *are* objects. And you can create new classes at runtime.
(snip)
But not in UML: a class diagram will represent classes while a sequence
diagram objects.
Yes, there's in UML a fundamental distinction between classes and
objects - distinction that does not exist in a lot of OO languages. This
greatly limits UML's usability for some common idioms in dynamic OOPL's.
Seems like UML has been designed to express only the restricted subset
of OO supported by rigid static languages like C++, Java and ADA.
My 2 cents
--
bruno desthuilliers
python -c print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
p in '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.split('@')])
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
Well, you can have a lot of things happening during the import stage. Is this 'runtime' or not ?-) Runtime. And you can actually *create* (not 'change') classes at runtime too. Yes sir! By now I am quite well aware what 'dynamic typing' means. Once again, round trip tools today model program structure/code/text, not runtime magic - all the stuff a dynamically typed language such as Python does differently from statically typed languages like Java. So this does not affect them much. Languages like Python with metaclasses and other dynamic aspects do present an interesting case for modelling but what I am talking about is round trip tools, not the full scope of modelling and UML. Round trip implementations today get at class and package diagrams (structural), not object diagrams and collaboration diagrams. Class and Package diagrams are concerned with the layout, not intricate runtime behaviour, mutations and mutilations of classes and packages. That would be the domain of behavioural diagrams of which I made no assertions. There isn't much magical about Python as far as code layout is concerned. Metaclasses can for example change the very behaviour of the class construct but modelling that is not the purpose of a class or package diagram. Rather than going hypothetical and us miscommunicating in the abstract plane, could you just tell me why you could not draw a class or package diagram for your last project? That will probably make me see what I am missing from your points. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
Ravi Teja wrote: What I mean is utility is the formal notation for a class in which global functions are aggregated. It's not a hack. Python is not alone here. Most OO languages aside Java and Smalltalk have functions outside classes and UML accomodates though not encourages free functions. It doesn't seem to sit well with the common Python idiom of having several free functions packaged in a module, sadly. Python is dynamic but only once the program starts executing :-). Even though Python classes can change, they do so only at runtime ( wouldn't it be scary if they decided to change as code when you are not looking :-) ). So dynamism of Python should not be as much of an issue. But on a similar note, I was wondering about classes such as BaseHTTPServer where the function to be called is looked up by name, and may or may not exist, or the situation where multiple function calls with similar signatures can be redirected to one using some getattr trickery - these don't seem to play well with the static nature of UML. (Or editor auto-completion, or cross-referencing code in an IDE...) I tend to shy away from such constructs for these reasons. -- Ben Sizer -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
Roman Susi wrote: [...] Also, my argument that Python is quite good at communicating design ideas is supported by the fact that Python developers do not use UML (or other modelling tools/languages) as often as say Java programmers, nor feel the need to. And probably Python is too dynamic for UML. That is another reason rountrip tools aren't there. Another reason is probably the problem you started this thread with; UML class diagrams are very much centered around Java style object orientation. Other paradigms, like the procedural and the generic ones, do not fit well. Nor is it well suited to represent the shift to a meta level that is involved when you start creating types at execution time. Cheers, Nicola Musatti -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
bruno at modulix wrote: [...] Yes, there's in UML a fundamental distinction between classes and objects - distinction that does not exist in a lot of OO languages. This greatly limits UML's usability for some common idioms in dynamic OOPL's. Seems like UML has been designed to express only the restricted subset of OO supported by rigid static languages like C++, Java and ADA. Moreover, it also seems like UML has been designed to express the restricted OO subset of the paradigms supported by languages like C++ and ADA. And I suspect UML design tools are not that popular within the C and Lisp programming communities... Cheers, Nicola Musatti -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Roman Susi wrote: Out of curiosity, how do I draw functions outside classes with UML? How module could be drawn in this case? I just create a (UML) class for modules. After all a Python module can be seen as a class definition for a singleton which is instantiated at import time. Thanks. That was precise answer to one of the questions. I am not able to answer to everyone, but I see it really boils down to UMLs restricted nature. That is quite ok. Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch Sy, Roman -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Standalone Python functions in UML?
Hi! Out of curiosity, how do I draw functions outside classes with UML? How module could be drawn in this case? More theoretical question is if I create classes on the fly, how UML can reflect that? (I know that Python code itself is best at communication design ideas, but there are some people which prefer to talk UML.) (Have not found anything relevant with google) Thanks! Regards, Roman Suzi -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
Out of curiosity, how do I draw functions outside classes with UML? How module could be drawn in this case? As a utility class. More theoretical question is if I create classes on the fly, how UML can reflect that? On the fly usually means at runtime. I guess you mean if you change code will my diagram stay in sync?. You will have to use round trip tools. I don't know any tool supports round trip for Python code. But if you just mean reverse engineering, lookup PyNSource, Boa Constructor, PyReverse among others (I know that Python code itself is best at communication design ideas, but there are some people which prefer to talk UML.) Actually no. Python is a good tool for prototyping which is not the same as communicating design ideas. Diagrams are better for the later and do not need to be executable. At least from what I know, except Eiffel, no language makes that claim. UML is really the only contender currently for design notation. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
Roman Susi wrote: Hi! Out of curiosity, how do I draw functions outside classes with UML? How module could be drawn in this case? I would say that within a class diagram, you can't. In other UML diagrams (such as sequence interaction), the function is simply used as if it were a method belonging to an object. If you need to make it clear where this function is located within the code, use a note on the diagram. Remember, UML is not able to accurately capture all implementation details of a system; It's not meant to. More theoretical question is if I create classes on the fly, how UML can reflect that? Again, don't try to depict fine-grained implementation details. If the dynamically generated class is important to the class diagram, include it but don't include all of it's internals (methods etc.). Use a note to exaplin how/when/why it is generated. (I know that Python code itself is best at communication design ideas, but there are some people which prefer to talk UML.) (Have not found anything relevant with google) Thanks! Regards, Roman Suzi Rob C -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
Roman Susi wrote: Hi! Out of curiosity, how do I draw functions outside classes with UML? How module could be drawn in this case? I'm not up to par on the latest UML specs (or not too old) - but I don't believe UML handles that: it is called a class diagram after all. More theoretical question is if I create classes on the fly, how UML can reflect that? You mean objects I think: by using a 0..n in you agregation ? (I know that Python code itself is best at communication design ideas, but there are some people which prefer to talk UML.) (Have not found anything relevant with google) Thanks! Regards, Roman Suzi Regards, Philippe -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
Ravi Teja wrote:
(snip)
More theoretical question is if I create classes on the fly, how UML can
reflect that?
On the fly usually means at runtime. I guess you mean if you
change code will my diagram stay in sync?.
Nope, the OP really meant on the fly, as in at runtime. In python,
it is possible to create new classes at runtime. Remember,
everything-is-an-object implies that classes are objects too.
--
bruno desthuilliers
python -c print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
p in '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.split('@')])
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
Philippe Martin wrote:
Roman Susi wrote:
(snip)
More theoretical question is if I create classes on the fly, how UML can
reflect that?
You mean objects I think:
Yes : class objects !-)
Python's classes *are* objects. And you can create new classes at runtime.
(snip)
--
bruno desthuilliers
python -c print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
p in '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.split('@')])
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
Ravi Teja wrote: Out of curiosity, how do I draw functions outside classes with UML? How module could be drawn in this case? As a utility class. So, function could be a utility class method. If there are no better ways. More theoretical question is if I create classes on the fly, how UML can reflect that? On the fly usually means at runtime. I guess you mean if you change code will my diagram stay in sync?. You will have to use round trip tools. I don't know any tool supports round trip for Python code. But if you just mean reverse engineering, lookup PyNSource, Boa Constructor, PyReverse among others No. I do not need it. I just want to know if UML is capable of doing it. (I know that Python code itself is best at communication design ideas, but there are some people which prefer to talk UML.) Actually no. Python is a good tool for prototyping which is not the same as communicating design ideas. Diagrams are better for the later and do not need to be executable. At least from what I know, except Eiffel, no language makes that claim. UML is really the only contender currently for design notation. Well, maybe SOL (Semantic Object Language) could also be quite beneficial in some cases. At least, it depends with whom to communicate design ideas and what level of formality to maintain. Also, my argument that Python is quite good at communicating design ideas is supported by the fact that Python developers do not use UML (or other modelling tools/languages) as often as say Java programmers, nor feel the need to. And probably Python is too dynamic for UML. That is another reason rountrip tools aren't there. -- Roman -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
But not in UML: a class diagram will represent classes while a sequence diagram objects. Philippe bruno at modulix wrote: Philippe Martin wrote: Roman Susi wrote: (snip) More theoretical question is if I create classes on the fly, how UML can reflect that? You mean objects I think: Yes : class objects !-) Python's classes *are* objects. And you can create new classes at runtime. (snip) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Standalone Python functions in UML?
So, function could be a utility class method. If there are no better ways. What I mean is utility is the formal notation for a class in which global functions are aggregated. It's not a hack. Python is not alone here. Most OO languages aside Java and Smalltalk have functions outside classes and UML accomodates though not encourages free functions. Well, maybe SOL (Semantic Object Language) could also be quite beneficial in some cases. At least, it depends with whom to communicate design ideas and what level of formality to maintain. I don't know what Semantic Object Language is. One important requirement of choosing communication notations is that they should be sufficiently popular that everyone understands. Kind of beats the purpose if you are the only person who knows it. I got 146 hits on Google for Semantic Object Language and UML. Too few for me to care. If it is a deserving notation, hopefully that will change in the future. Also, my argument that Python is quite good at communicating design ideas is supported by the fact that Python developers do not use UML (or other modelling tools/languages) as often as say Java programmers, nor feel the need to. I guess you and I mean VERY different things when we say Design Ideas. You seem to imply pseudo code. I mean overall archetecture. I think Python devs will use UML tools if there are good ones available. I know I would. I could really use a round trip class and package diagram editor now. And probably Python is too dynamic for UML. That is another reason rountrip tools aren't there. As you probably already know, UML diagrams are structural and behavioural (plus interactional with 2.0). Round trip tools only model structural diagrams. Python is dynamic but only once the program starts executing :-). Even though Python classes can change, they do so only at runtime ( wouldn't it be scary if they decided to change as code when you are not looking :-) ). So dynamism of Python should not be as much of an issue. I think the reason we don't have good UML round trip tools for Python is primarily a market issue rather than a language issue. If Python gets the same market share as Java, it will surely get all these tools and more. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
