(I am deliberately TOP POSTING my reply to this because it seems most
appropriate.)
B E A U T I F U L L Y S A I D ! ! !
Drieux writes:
>
> On Dec 9, 2003, at 7:08 PM, R. Joseph Newton wrote:
> [..]
> > UML? Isn't that the stuff the once-long-ago-knew-how-to-code
> > professional sycophants use to make pretty pictures for execs,
> > so that the execs can go to bed in the warm contented illusion
> > that they actually understand something about the systems they are
> > paying for?
> [..]
>
> Well it sorta depends upon the Politics of the Dance.
>
> { Warning: Possible Religious War Material }
>
> As an Annotational System for "Higher Level" documentation
> UML can provide a common set of glyphs useful both in
> the BDUF - Big Design Up Front - "Design, then Code" approach,
> or as a "Follow On Documentation" process from say the
> eXtreme strategy as a prelude to POD.
>
> As a 'rapid prototyping tool' I prefer Perl, since
> we can get from glyph to 'well does that really make sense'
> reasonably quickly. Then as we start into the process of
> doing the metrics of analysis can worry about which parts
> really need to be tightened up to meet 'performance requirements'
> once the 'bottle neck' is identified.
>
> If one does not design, nor document one's code,
> Then there is no need for UML, or a UML like common
> glyph set to provide an annotational system.
>
> caveat: you may need to review what you are doing if
> you do not design and/or document your code. This is
> a Leading Cause of Bad Kharma! Do NOT DO THIS!
>
> { Having convinced an associate who has written man pages
> in Raw roff since the Epoch to float over to POD, it is
> uh, scary, since his "c-code" docs now comes in three flavors,
> POD, the manified Pod, and the html'ized Pod... So getting
> to POD has value outside of merely Perl.
>
> But I can also read his whiteBoard Glyphs and go
> Oh, one of those types of OLTP's...
> But this also means I have to UML-ize it so that the
> Glyph Set is more 'portable' to humans who have color
> perception, and do not dream in ASCII art...
> }
>
> Like all annotational systems between the designer
> and the implemented machine language sequence of
> bits that the CPU may BARF on, it is subject to
> various abuses. But the defect is NOT in UML, but
> in the persons hurling BuzzPhraseDuJure in lieu of
> actual technical stuff.
>
> IF you need to KarlRove the material, you should be
> doing this in PowerPoint. It should NOT contain any
> actual Technical Information that can be used by
> the SEC and/or Justice Department Investigators or
> Prosecutors in subsequent litigation or indictments for
> violations of SEC Regulations and/or Other possible
> Felony Indictments. { consult with your solicitor
> prior to recieving the warrents... }
>
> IF the PowerPoint Wars leak into Engineering, to
> bloat out the UML wars, it is time to float your resume.
> They will not be worrying about delivering technical
> solutions, and are in the Power Dive of Spin Doctoring.
>
> ciao
> drieux
>
> ---
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <http://learn.perl.org/> <http://learn.perl.org/first-response>
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<http://learn.perl.org/> <http://learn.perl.org/first-response>
