* OcaML & UML
@ 2007-08-02 11:54 Ed Keith
2007-08-02 12:12 ` [Caml-list] " Erik de Castro Lopo
2007-08-02 12:39 ` Christophe TROESTLER
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Ed Keith @ 2007-08-02 11:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: caml-list
A potential client requires that the system be
documented in UML, but do not specify what language it
will be implemented in. I have used UML to document
C++ and Java, and know UML is supposed to be
implementation language independent, but am concerned
that the impedance mismatch with Ocaml may make it
impractical to combine UML and Ocaml. Any thoughts?
Thanks,
-EdK
Ed Keith
e_d_k@yahoo.com
Blog: edkeith.blogspot.com
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [Caml-list] OcaML & UML
2007-08-02 11:54 OcaML & UML Ed Keith
@ 2007-08-02 12:12 ` Erik de Castro Lopo
2007-08-02 12:39 ` Christophe TROESTLER
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Erik de Castro Lopo @ 2007-08-02 12:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: caml-list
Ed Keith wrote:
> A potential client requires that the system be
> documented in UML, but do not specify what language it
> will be implemented in. I have used UML to document
> C++ and Java, and know UML is supposed to be
> implementation language independent, but am concerned
> that the impedance mismatch with Ocaml may make it
> impractical to combine UML and Ocaml. Any thoughts?
Well since UML is designed specifically for object modelling
and that the vast majority of Ocaml code I have seen and write
myself is functional rather than object oriented, this looks
like a match made in hell :-).
Erik
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Erik de Castro Lopo
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated
Development That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb. Thank you."
-- Vance Petree
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [Caml-list] OcaML & UML
2007-08-02 11:54 OcaML & UML Ed Keith
2007-08-02 12:12 ` [Caml-list] " Erik de Castro Lopo
@ 2007-08-02 12:39 ` Christophe TROESTLER
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Christophe TROESTLER @ 2007-08-02 12:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ed Keith; +Cc: O'Caml Mailing List
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 04:54:16 -0700 (PDT), Ed Keith wrote:
>
> A potential client requires that the system be
> documented in UML, but do not specify what language it
> will be implemented in. I have used UML to document
> C++ and Java, and know UML is supposed to be
> implementation language independent, but am concerned
> that the impedance mismatch with Ocaml may make it
> impractical to combine UML and Ocaml. Any thoughts?
Maybe you will find the following discussion useful:
<http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/1828>. As somebidy said:
[...] you could use UML to model a system you plan to implement with
FP: use class diagrams for modules, data members for data types and
methods for functions.
Cheers,
ChriS
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-08-02 12:39 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-08-02 11:54 OcaML & UML Ed Keith
2007-08-02 12:12 ` [Caml-list] " Erik de Castro Lopo
2007-08-02 12:39 ` Christophe TROESTLER
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).