For more info on a specific newsletter, click the title. Details will be displayed in a new window.
Subscribe to
Computerworld 40 years of the most authoritative source of news and information for IT leaders.
|
|
|
|
March 22, 2004 (Computerworld) -- When IBM acquired Rational Software Corp., the company gained the expertise of two technologists who have been instrumental in the development of the Unified Modeling Language (UML).
Grady Booch, Rational's former chief technology officer who is now an IBM fellow, is considered a father of UML, since the standard is based on the modeling language he created. Bran Selic, a distinguished engineer in IBM's Rational Software division, co-chairs a task force that is finalizing the new UML 2.0 standard with the Object Management Group.
Booch and Selic recently spoke with Computerworld about UML 2.0, which is expected to be finalized by midyear.
What are the major differences between UML 1.5 and the upcoming 2.0 version?
Selic: In 1.5, we introduced something called the action semantics, which is a way of modeling some of the fine-grain detail that comes in with specifying models, maybe even down to the level of individual instructions. Along with that came this idea of describing what that actually means in terms of the runtime. How is this thing executed? What does a program that this thing models look like? And that introduced something which was a key element of the UML 2.0 -- a very precise definition of the semantics or the meaning of these models in the sense that one could now, for example, take a UML model and directly translate it, in some cases, into programs directly. This is part of a much more general thing called Model Driven Architecture (MDA), which is shifting the focus from the programs toward models, because models are much closer to the way that people writing applications or at least using applications think about their problems. It's a higher level of abstraction.
One of the fundamental inputs to UML 2.0 was support for Model Driven Architecture and model-driven development [MDD]. That required a somewhat greater precision of UML than there was originally in the spec. ... The other one that I would single out as being a major influence is the ability to model very large heterogeneous systems so that one could describe the architectures of these systems quite succinctly.
The project in formulating UML 2.0 started almost three years ago, and we are now in the closing stages of adopting the standard. We have released one version so that people who are building tools that conform to the standard can look at it and come back with feedback. And various researchers and other people who are interested in UML and model-driven development are looking at the spec and giving us feedback.
For a corporate developer who has been using UML 1.0, how will UML 2.0 make their lives better?
Selic: They have choice. We were careful when we designed 2.0 that people who want to use UML as they've been using it to date are pretty safe, and they don't necessarily have to move up to the new features. The language is designed in such a way that you don't have to know about the new things in order to use the old things.
|
Print this Story |
|
Send Us Feedback |
|
E-mail this Story |
|
Digg this Story |
|
Slashdot this Story |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
All Zones Application Performance Zone Enterprise-Class Security Zone Enterprise Solutions Zone The File Data Management Zone Grid Computing on Windows Zone Security Management Zone ITIL Best Practices Zone The SAS Zone Storage Virtualization Zone The Data Center Management Zone |
 See your link here
|
 |
||||||||
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
|
Download this Computerworld report, free for a limited time, compliments of HP.
Download this white paper, free, compliments of CiRBA.
Rapid, Widespread Adoption of CMMI at Lockheed Martin with Application Lifecycle Management
Read up on the latest ideas and technologies from companies that sell hardware, software and services.
- FAQ: Windows XP SP3 reboot hell (and how to get out of it)
- HP-EDS deal spurs range of customer reactions
- WiMax vs. Long Term Evolution: Let the battle begin
- More top stories
| Independent Report by Forrester Research, Courtesy of MKS: "Selecting the Right Requirements Management Tool — Or Maybe None Whatsoever"  Many of today's requirements management tool purchases are misguided: Application development and program management professionals often buy requirements management tools for the wrong reasons and select tools that are out of line with their needs. In this independent report, Forrester advises app dev organizations to be realistic about the problems that a requirements management tool can address, the level of tooling that they require, and their ability to build and maintain tool integrations.
Download this white paper now
See more Whitepapers |
| Detect, identify, and locate RF interference in 802.11 WLANs. AnalyzeAir software provides IT network professionals with the vision they need into the hidden world of RF, providing them with the ability to see the spectrum in a visible and intelligible format. AnalyzeAir software lets you see, monitor, analyze, and manage all the RF sources and wireless devices that influence your Wi-Fi network's performance and security, even if those devices are unauthorized or transient. AnalyzeAir Trial Software v3.1 highlights the features found in AnalyzeAir Software using a set of saved spectrum files. Replay the data and experience the visibility that AnalyzeAir Wi-Fi Spectrum Analyzer provides. Note: The trial software is limited to a player version only. It does not communicate with an AnalyzeAir PC card so it does not collect actual spectrum data. Register for this trial now.
|
CIO
Computerworld
CSO
DEMO
GamePro
Games.net
IDG Connect
IDG World Expo
Infoworld
The Industry Standard
ITworld
JavaWorld
LinuxWorld
MacUser
Macworld
Network World
PC World
Playlist
Copyright © 2008 Computerworld Inc. All
rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium
without express written permission of Computerworld Inc. is prohibited.
Computerworld and Computerworld.com and the respective logos are
trademarks of International Data Group Inc.
|
