Subject: Re: long method signatures in uml class diagrams
Date: 15 Oct 2002 09:42:39 -0500
On Tue, 15 Oct 2002, Marco Craveiro wrote:
> 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...
Agreed. Whether or not long names are a useful thing, they are bound to
come up again and again, and we should handle them more gracefully.
> 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.
Excellent! Use documentation is a great asset.
> 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).
Maybe after this, you can write "C++ Modelling Using Dia":)
Lars Clausen (http://shasta.cs.uiuc.edu/~lrclause)| HŚrdgrim of Numenor
"I do not agree with a word that you say, but I |----------------------------
will defend to the death your right to say it." | Where are we going, and
--Evelyn Beatrice Hall paraphrasing Voltaire | what's with the handbasket?