Re: long method signatures in uml class diagrams

["Craveiro, Marco" <mcraveiro ndsuk com>]

Title: Re: long method signatures in uml class diagrams

hi dia hackers,

thanks for all the feedback. i agree with James K. Lowden and respectfully disagree with Lars Clausen in that its easy to get a long signature without having a very complex class. i'm thinking of templates, namespaces, etc. all used together (i.e. NAMESPACE_A::NAMESPACE_B::CLASS_A::TYPEDEF) on the return type of a function. this happens often on the system i'm trying to reverse-engineer. but as james said, discussing that is probably beyond the scope of dia-list...

nevertheless, i think one of the greatest uses for uml is reverse-engineering since it enables one
to get aquatinted with *very* large systems in a more organized way - rather than just browse the source
until you grok it. imho it would be most useful if dia had good support for this activity; reverse engineering in rational-rose is painful - actually, let me rephrase that, rational-rose *is* painful :-))) it gets too much on your way, especially wrt cost :-D

Alan (Horkan), in terms of inserting linebreaks on unix, i have tried that and it did not work.

i just wanted to know if there was an easy solution, since there isn't i'll just leave as it is.

in the mean time i'm writing down all the difficulties and problems i'm experiencing while reverse-engineering this large project. hopefully when i'm finished i'll write a summary of it all, check against the mailing list archives to see if any of the problems have been discussed / resolved and post those which have not been discussed / resolved.

until now (i'm about 50% of the way through, by my estimates :-))) i have had no major problems, just niggling things. in fact my main problem

is finding some good documentation on the web on how to map c++ to uml... (found a few books, maybe i'll buy one).

cheers,

soup++
--
dna.h: #include <std_disclaimer> /* god */