UML tool for Linux?

Does anyone know of a good OO modelling (UML?) tool for Linux, that works well
with the Ruby way of doing things? ie not one loaded with features specific
to C++ or Java…

Tim Bates

···


tim@bates.id.au

You could try Dia, it’s pretty language agnostic, but I’m not sure if it
will have everything you want

···

On Sun, 2003-01-12 at 21:47, Tim Bates wrote:

Does anyone know of a good OO modelling (UML?) tool for Linux, that works well
with the Ruby way of doing things? ie not one loaded with features specific
to C++ or Java…

Tim Bates

Scott Brooks scottbrooks@telusplanet.net

Try Poseidon (http://www.gentleware.com). It is written in Java, however may
be used effectively for modelling for other languages (if you do not need
code generation, because it can do in only for Java). Standard edition is
free of charge.

Gennady.

···

----- Original Message -----
From: “Tim Bates” tim@bates.id.au
To: “ruby-talk ML” ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 8:47 PM
Subject: UML tool for Linux?

Does anyone know of a good OO modelling (UML?) tool for Linux, that works
well
with the Ruby way of doing things? ie not one loaded with features specific
to C++ or Java…

Tim Bates

tim@bates.id.au

Umbrello (KDE) in sourceforge

Regards,

Enrique Meza
//

···

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

In article 200301131517.24081.tim@bates.id.au,

Does anyone know of a good OO modelling (UML?) tool for Linux, that works well
with the Ruby way of doing things? ie not one loaded with features specific
to C++ or Java…

Tim Bates

I’m not answering your question, but asking you a question… please don’t
take this wrong, but I’ve been curious about this UML stuff and since
you’re asking about UML I’m assuming you know it and use it. I’ve never
done any UML and I don’t know much about it other than it’s a graphical
way to model the interactions in an OO system. So with that in mind…

What good is UML? I mean, it seems to me that especially with languages
like Ruby you could just code your OO system and then refactor as needed.
You could even use Ruby as a prototyping tool to come up with an OO design
for your application and then code the final app in C++ or Java after
you’ve done some experimenting in Ruby.
I remember that when I was first learning programming (longer ago than I
want to admit) flow charts were still in vogue… now nobody does a
flowchart, they might do pseudo-code, but I haven’t seen a flowchart in
years. It seems to me that UML is kind of like flowcharting… am I
wrong?

Phil

···

Tim Bates tim@bates.id.au wrote:

"Or perhaps the truth is less interesting than the facts?"
Amy Weiss (accusing theregister.co.uk of engaging in ‘tabloid journalism’)
Senior VP, Communications
Recording Industry Association of America

Hi !!

Try this http://www.objecteering.com/downloads.php

//Mike

···

----- Original Message -----
From: “Tim Bates” tim@bates.id.au
To: “ruby-talk ML” ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 5:47 AM
Subject: UML tool for Linux?

Does anyone know of a good OO modelling (UML?) tool for Linux, that works well
with the Ruby way of doing things? ie not one loaded with features specific
to C++ or Java…

Tim Bates

tim@bates.id.au

I use Dia, personally, but my boss writes our diagrams using Visual UML on
Windows. It doesn’t make much of a difference for just drawing diagrams;
they apply pretty well to any object oriented language, and never have had
a problem with UML and Ruby.

Of course, by modelling tool you may mean a design tool as well as code
generators which write your classes and necessary persistence mechanisms
and everything for you. As far as I know this doesn’t exist for Ruby.
There is a tool for Dia for generating code for other languages, perhaps
Ruby could be added to the list.

There is nothing out there like the Rational products for Ruby. It isn’t
possible at this point for example to have a database that can generate
UML which can then generate classes and then incorporate code changes back
into the UML. C++ and Java programmers might sneer at Ruby for this, but
then, C++ and Java programmers probably need those things more than we do.

–Gabriel

···

On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:47:42 +0900, Tim Bates wrote:

Does anyone know of a good OO modelling (UML?) tool for Linux, that
works well with the Ruby way of doing things? ie not one loaded with
features specific to C++ or Java…

Tim Bates

I came across this tool a while back …

http://www.swt.tuwien.ac.at/umlet/index.html

Its small and has a minimum of features. I wouldn’t use it for a large
project, but it’s cool for a diagram or two.

···

On Sun, 2003-01-12 at 23:47, Tim Bates wrote:

Does anyone know of a good OO modelling (UML?) tool for Linux, that works well
with the Ruby way of doing things? ie not one loaded with features specific
to C++ or Java…


– Jim Weirich jweirich@one.net http://w3.one.net/~jweirich

“Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct,
not tried it.” – Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)

You could try Dia, it’s pretty language agnostic, but I’m not sure if it
will have everything you want
And them dia2code which translate the UML diagramme to code (C++, C, Java,
Python, ADA, PHP). Ruby is still not supported :-(.
cf http://dia2code.sourceforge.net/

Umbrello (KDE) in sourceforge

I forgot the URL …

http://uml.sourceforge.net/index.php

···

Regards,

Enrique Meza
//


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

I’ve never really used UML myself, so these are just my random
impressions of what UML can be used for.

UML seems to be a bit more detailed, enough so that you could create a
UML diagram for your application, and others could implement the code
following the interfaces defined in the UML diagram. This would allow
for more independent development.

Just my thoughts

···

On Mon, 2003-01-13 at 21:53, Phil Tomson wrote:

In article 200301131517.24081.tim@bates.id.au,
Tim Bates tim@bates.id.au wrote:

Does anyone know of a good OO modelling (UML?) tool for Linux, that works well
with the Ruby way of doing things? ie not one loaded with features specific
to C++ or Java…

Tim Bates

I’m not answering your question, but asking you a question… please don’t
take this wrong, but I’ve been curious about this UML stuff and since
you’re asking about UML I’m assuming you know it and use it. I’ve never
done any UML and I don’t know much about it other than it’s a graphical
way to model the interactions in an OO system. So with that in mind…

What good is UML? I mean, it seems to me that especially with languages
like Ruby you could just code your OO system and then refactor as needed.
You could even use Ruby as a prototyping tool to come up with an OO design
for your application and then code the final app in C++ or Java after
you’ve done some experimenting in Ruby.
I remember that when I was first learning programming (longer ago than I
want to admit) flow charts were still in vogue… now nobody does a
flowchart, they might do pseudo-code, but I haven’t seen a flowchart in
years. It seems to me that UML is kind of like flowcharting… am I
wrong?

Phil

Scott Brooks scottbrooks@telusplanet.net

In article 200301131517.24081.tim@bates.id.au,

Does anyone know of a good OO modelling (UML?) tool for Linux, that works well
with the Ruby way of doing things? ie not one loaded with features specific
to C++ or Java…

Tim Bates

I’m not answering your question, but asking you a question… please don’t
take this wrong, but I’ve been curious about this UML stuff and since
you’re asking about UML I’m assuming you know it and use it. I’ve never
done any UML and I don’t know much about it other than it’s a graphical
way to model the interactions in an OO system. So with that in mind…

What good is UML? I mean, it seems to me that especially with languages
like Ruby you could just code your OO system and then refactor as needed.
You could even use Ruby as a prototyping tool to come up with an OO design
for your application and then code the final app in C++ or Java after
you’ve done some experimenting in Ruby.

Doing this kind of prototyping is a great way to work, especially if
you are forced to use Java etc. at work. You do all your refactoring
in Ruby, gain confidence in you class/object model, and then you can
have that great experience of getting it right first time in the
target language.

I don’t know much about UML, but I know I don’t really like it. But I
get the niggly feeling that I would be a better OO analyst if I did
know it.

That said, even though prototyping is a great way to work, some effort
in up-front design is usally warranted in a medium-large project, and
when you do that, you’re probably doing UML in spirit if not in name.

I remember that when I was first learning programming (longer ago than I
want to admit) flow charts were still in vogue… now nobody does a
flowchart, they might do pseudo-code, but I haven’t seen a flowchart in
years. It seems to me that UML is kind of like flowcharting… am I
wrong?

Time will tell, but I reckon you’re right. UML seems pretty bound to
old languages like Java and C++. Even if Ruby doesn’t take over the
world, something will eventually beat those in “corporate mindshare”,
and it will take several leaves out of Ruby’s book. Once that
happens, UML will start looking pretty dated. But that’s evolution,
not a fault of UML as such. Think of it this way: if no-one ever used
flowcharts, we wouldn’t have Ruby.

Gavin

···

On Tuesday, January 14, 2003, 3:53:28 PM, Phil wrote:

Tim Bates tim@bates.id.au wrote:

I haven’t actually used UML before, which is why I’m only just looking for
software for it. The reason is, I come from a strong engineering background
(father was an engineer, I’m now studying engineering myself) and as such I
find it helpful (sometimes even necessary) to get my ideas on paper, draw
diagrams etc. I’m currently trying to get my head around the relationships
between a significant number of classes and modules. Being a fairly visual
person, I want diagrams, but rather than try and do it with conventional
pen-and-paper methods, and end up as I usually do with lots of lines and
scribble and crossings-out, I thought I’d give UML a shot. It’s designed for
this sort of thing and has the advantage that I can check it into CVS along
with the code… It may work, it may not.

Tim Bates

···

On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 03:23 pm, Phil Tomson wrote:

What good is UML? I mean, it seems to me that especially with languages
like Ruby you could just code your OO system and then refactor as needed.


tim@bates.id.au

To me, UML is good for a few things. First, it is a language which can be
used to communicate with others. If I draw a UML diagram, anyone else who
understands UML diagrams will know precisely what I mean. If I just
doodle circles and squares and things, they are up for interpretation.

It might be easier to just start coding in a language like Ruby, if you
are the only developer. On a team, where you may all be working on
different areas of a project, being able to refer to a diagram for most of
your questions is a good thing.

On my team, if it is in UML, it is what gets implemented, and if it isn’t
reflected in the diagram and you implemented it, you are wrong, no matter
how much better the code is. Of course, I am always willing to change the
UML after some discussion, but the point is that it is your blueprint. It
keeps me from installing a toilet where you think the kitchen is, from
running electricity through the sewage lines, from putting a stairway in
the center of a closet.

It’s great for test-first programming. You can write your test cases
against the UML. It really helps keep you on track.

–Gabriel

···

What good is UML? I mean, it seems to me that especially with languages
like Ruby you could just code your OO system and then refactor as needed.
You could even use Ruby as a prototyping tool to come up with an OO design
for your application and then code the final app in C++ or Java after

Scott Brooks scottbrooks@telusplanet.net writes:

You could try Dia, it’s pretty language agnostic, but I’m not sure if it
will have everything you want

I haven’t been able to figure out how to do moderately complex
sequence diagrams with Dia. I can create a lifeline with one operation
on it, but I can’t figure out how to add another box representing a
separate operation on the same object, but in a different call chain.

Clues are welcome.

-=Eric

···


Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million
typewriters, and Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare.
– Blair Houghton.

Just a minute ago, I was wondering whether there was a UML package for KDE.

Thanks,
Ot

···

On Tuesday 14 January 2003 05:39 am, Enrique Meza wrote:

Umbrello (KDE) in sourceforge

I forgot the URL …

http://uml.sourceforge.net/index.php

My uninvited 2c:

Tim Bates wrote:

What good is UML? I mean, it seems to me that especially with languages
like Ruby you could just code your OO system and then refactor as needed.

I haven’t actually used UML before, which is why I’m only just looking for
software for it. The reason is, I come from a strong engineering background
(father was an engineer, I’m now studying engineering myself) and as such I
find it helpful (sometimes even necessary) to get my ideas on paper, draw
diagrams etc.

I find exactly the same thing - I go through forests of paper just
scribbling static class diagrams when modelling problems. But I dont
use any tools, and wouldn’t suggest them to anyone (I’d also be
interested to hear of reasons for using them).

I’m currently trying to get my head around the relationships
between a significant number of classes and modules. Being a fairly visual
person, I want diagrams, but rather than try and do it with conventional
pen-and-paper methods, and end up as I usually do with lots of lines and
scribble and crossings-out, I thought I’d give UML a shot.

Remember that UML is a language, not a process (as I understand it).
The process of taking UML and generating code is a proprietory thing.
Having said that, I know of a java tool called uml2ejb (I think its
http://uml2ejb.sf.net) that could easily output Ruby code if you wanted
to go that way. Note that this (afaik) doesn’t actually generate the
UML for you.

It’s designed for
this sort of thing and has the advantage that I can check it into CVS along
with the code… It may work, it may not.

what then happens when you change the code? you have uml in cvs with
one design and code with another… unless you’re going to be the first
person I’ve come into contact who actually does go back and update the
UML…

cheers
dim

···

On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 03:23 pm, Phil Tomson wrote:

In article 200301141542.16206.tim@bates.id.au,

What good is UML? I mean, it seems to me that especially with languages
like Ruby you could just code your OO system and then refactor as needed.

I haven’t actually used UML before, which is why I’m only just looking for
software for it. The reason is, I come from a strong engineering background
(father was an engineer, I’m now studying engineering myself) and as such I
find it helpful (sometimes even necessary) to get my ideas on paper, draw
diagrams etc. I’m currently trying to get my head around the relationships
between a significant number of classes and modules. Being a fairly visual
person, I want diagrams, but rather than try and do it with conventional
pen-and-paper methods, and end up as I usually do with lots of lines and
scribble and crossings-out, I thought I’d give UML a shot. It’s designed for
this sort of thing and has the advantage that I can check it into CVS along
with the code… It may work, it may not.

I was originally more of a hardware engineer than a software engineer, now
I’m into software for creating hardware, but I digress… Again, years ago
when I started out on the hardware side of things schematics (pictures
that represented a circuit and it’s connections) were used heavily in
hardware design. Nowadays schematics, for digital design anyway, seem
rather quaint. The problem with schematics was that it took so long to
draw them and for complex systems you needed lots and lots of schematics.
In the late 80’s and early 90’s hardware descriptions languages burst on
the scene… as it turns out a picture wasn’t worth a thousand words.
HDL’s have proven to be a much better way of representing hardware
designs. Now HDL’s are moving to a higher level of expressiveness (like
programming languages in general) and are being based on C++ (or Ruby -
see RHDL :).

So it would seem that both on the software side (with flowcharts) and the
hardware side (with schematics) there has been a move away from the
pictorial representation of designs because of the inherent limitations of
those representations for representing complexity and their
’unwieldlyness’. Given these trends I have to conclude that UML will
disappear eventually as well… I guess that’s why I’ve never bothered to
learn UML.

Phil

···

Tim Bates tim@bates.id.au wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 03:23 pm, Phil Tomson wrote:


"Or perhaps the truth is less interesting than the facts?"
Amy Weiss (accusing theregister.co.uk of engaging in ‘tabloid journalism’)
Senior VP, Communications
Recording Industry Association of America

To me, UML is good for a few things. First, it is a language which can be
used to communicate with others. If I draw a UML diagram, anyone else who
understands UML diagrams will know precisely what I mean. If I just
doodle circles and squares and things, they are up for interpretation.

[snip]

I tend to agree with Phil. But maybe that’s just because,
like him, I don’t know UML.

I’m OK with the idea of a design notation that is (1) universal
and (2) language-neutral. In fact, more than OK, I think it’s
the only sensible way to go IF you use a design notation at all.

The big problem that I have is simply that it’s graphical. It’s
too pictorial for my taste.

Why couldn’t there be an equivalent notation that was text-based?
There probably is, but I don’t know of it.

Just my $0.01

Hal

···

----- Original Message -----
From: “Gabriel Emerson” gemerson@evalsoft.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
To: “ruby-talk ML” ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 12:55 PM
Subject: Re: UML tool for Linux?

My $0.02:

I’m relatively new to serious programming and started looking at UML
soon after starting to work with Ruby.

As I understand it, UML has two main purposes: (1) to facilitate
communication about design decisions, particularly for large projects,
and (2) to provide visual aids in the analysis and design process.
There are also some technologies that will transfer rigorous UML
diagrams to code (or preliminary code) in at least some programming
languages.

Being a learner of programming, item (1) is not that important to me.
I tend to think in visual terms, so item (2) is helpful to me and using
UML seems more sensible than inventing my own notation, particularly
since UML reflects and incorporates some time-tested principles of
object-oriented analysis and design.

I found the books UML Explained and UML Distilled to be useful.

···

On Tuesday, January 14, 2003, at 12:18 AM, Dmitri Colebatch wrote:

My uninvited 2c:

Tim Bates wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 03:23 pm, Phil Tomson wrote:

What good is UML? I mean, it seems to me that especially with
languages
like Ruby you could just code your OO system and then refactor as
needed.
I haven’t actually used UML before, which is why I’m only just
looking for software for it. The reason is, I come from a strong
engineering background (father was an engineer, I’m now studying
engineering myself) and as such I find it helpful (sometimes even
necessary) to get my ideas on paper, draw diagrams etc.

I find exactly the same thing - I go through forests of paper just
scribbling static class diagrams when modelling problems. But I dont
use any tools, and wouldn’t suggest them to anyone (I’d also be
interested to hear of reasons for using them).

I’m currently trying to get my head around the relationships
between a significant number of classes and modules. Being a fairly
visual person, I want diagrams, but rather than try and do it with
conventional pen-and-paper methods, and end up as I usually do with
lots of lines and scribble and crossings-out, I thought I’d give UML
a shot.

Remember that UML is a language, not a process (as I understand it).
The process of taking UML and generating code is a proprietory thing.
Having said that, I know of a java tool called uml2ejb (I think its
http://uml2ejb.sf.net) that could easily output Ruby code if you
wanted to go that way. Note that this (afaik) doesn’t actually
generate the UML for you.

It’s designed for
this sort of thing and has the advantage that I can check it into CVS
along with the code… It may work, it may not.

what then happens when you change the code? you have uml in cvs with
one design and code with another… unless you’re going to be the
first person I’ve come into contact who actually does go back and
update the UML…

cheers
dim