[Uml-user] basic questions
Jonathan Riddell
jr at jriddell.org
Sat Mar 27 10:42:08 UTC 2004
On Sat, Mar 27, 2004 at 06:12:48PM +0000, Bryan Lawrence wrote:
> On thinking about it, it does make sense to try and remain language agnostic
> in the UML ... after all, it's not supposed to be a RAD tool per se ...
> however, I do think any UML tool should support an array datatype because
> that's a concept that is universal in real programming languages (ok, so I
> confess to being a fortran programmer at heart).
Ah but arrays are supported by having a one to many link 1-----0..*
> I'm not quite sure I understood your last sentence. Was that bit the bit in
> your reply addressing my question about the attributes which are forced to be
> integers (and nothing else - unlike the return values from operations, which
> are allowed to be any builtin datatype). Did you mean then, that it shoudn't
> do anything at all, or it should behave the same as the operations?
It was just a note to self. If you create an attribute and give it
a type of an existing class it creates a datatype which it shouldn't.
Another beastie to fix.
Jonathan
More information about the umbrello
mailing list