Thanks Jason.. Wish you the same...

cheers,
benjy


----- Original Message ----
From: jasongorman_uk <jasongorman@...>
To: parlezuml@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, January 1, 2007 11:39:01 AM
Subject: [parlezuml] Happy New Year!

To those of you who celebrated New Year last night - and, judging by
my head this morning, I was certainly one of them! - I wish you a
happy and prosporous 2007.

Warm regards

Jason Gorman
http://www.parlezuml.com





Yahoo! Groups Links

I've been seeing how a current client of mine is very quick to extol
the virtues of various best practices when *someone else* is writing
the code, but it all seems to go out of the window when they're
writing code themselves.

(see my blog post - http://parlezuml.com/blog/?postid=321)

I know lots of developers who moan endlessly about bureaucracy, but as
soon as they start working in software process improvement they
suddenly become very prescriptive and want to define rules and
standard procedures for everything.

Has anyone in the group been on the receiving end of this? (Or dishing
it out?!)

Jason Gorman
http://www.parlezuml.com

Has anyone out there had any experience with Visual Studio Team
System? What features are you using, and what thoughts do you have
about it? Good? Bad? Indifferent?

Hi,
We just started using it recently.

Currently we are focussing on the source control (had to get rid of the awful
VSS) and have linked it to VS2003 for a set of projects that are still in .NET
1.1. Works quite decently (but then anything is better than VSS)

Really like the integration across project plans, work items, tests, reports etc
(which we prototyped) and that will feature heavily in future projects Looking
at customizing the process templates (agile, scrum, cmmi etc) to fit the
practices at the client site.
(but then again, Jason, if you are an enemy of MS Project, as you said on your
site somewhere, you wouldnt like all this anyway).

The other side is also useful - application designer, class designer etc.
Especially useful when combined with the new DSLs and factories stuff. Havent
tried out code coverage etc but should do that soon.

Overall, my impression is that its pretty useful and it looks like its
definitely going places.

cheers
benjy

----- Original Message ----
From: jasongorman_uk <jasongorman@...>
To: parlezuml@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 12:15:43 PM
Subject: [parlezuml] Team System


Has anyone out there had any experience with Visual Studio Team
System? What features are you using, and what thoughts do you have
about it? Good? Bad? Indifferent?




Yahoo! Groups Links

Supposed I want to design a usercontrol in .NET (say some sort of
grapher) and plop it onto a Windows Form in an application.

How might one model this in UML?

The control itself is a subclass of "System...Usercontrol".
The form is a subclass of "System...Form"
When we plop it on the form, Visual Studio automatically adds code
that says something like:

    myForm.Controls.Add(userControl);

Also, we somehow want to show the relationship between the control's
events and the event handlers in the form code (like what happens if
you click, etc).

This seems like a simple question, but I've yet to see it handled
clearly -- meaning, if I gave a set of diagrams to someone, would
they be able to code it properly?

(NOTE to Jason: it is also conspicuously missing from the UML
for .NET documents <sigh>)

Note that this is NOT about graphical user interface design....I'm
not particularly concerned with what the control looks like, only how
I represent its behaviour.

Any ideas/suggestions?

--- In parlezuml@yahoogroups.com, "jasongorman_uk" <jasongorman@...>
wrote:
>
> Has anyone out there had any experience with Visual Studio Team
> System? What features are you using, and what thoughts do you have
> about it? Good? Bad? Indifferent?
>
Hi jason,

Currently we are started using Team Sysytem and we are able to
successfully mapped it with Shrepoint. But though its giving good
features of VSS, MSP, Solution Explorer, Cutomise task queries,
etc...in one bundle, It seems not stable. We as a team we are using it
from last 3-4 months but sometime we may face problems like, it wont
get refreshed task assigned to team members quickly, which cuzes some
confusion. May be we need to become more handy to digest Team System.

Regards
Mak

--- In parlezuml@yahoogroups.com, "jasongorman_uk" <jasongorman@...>
wrote:
>
> Has anyone out there had any experience with Visual Studio Team
> System? What features are you using, and what thoughts do you have
> about it? Good? Bad? Indifferent?
>
Hi jason,

Currently we are started using Team Sysytem and we are able to
successfully mapped it with Shrepoint. But though its giving good
features of VSS, MSP, Solution Explorer, Cutomise task queries,
etc...in one bundle, It seems not stable. We as a team we are using it
from last 3-4 months but sometime we may face problems like, it wont
get refreshed task assigned to team members quickly, which cuzes some
confusion. May be we need to become more handy to digest Team System.

Regards
Mak

I did the "deep dive" training and we are starting a project to implement it on our software factory for CMMI achievement.

 

Before, we had a process very similar, that used a Sharepoint portal, 3 VSS databases (development, testing and client validation), and a build tool that we developed wich connects to sharepoint and VSS 6 API.

 

The integration with the MS client tools is really good, the application system and datacenter designer are good ideas but have a lot to improve. The policies and alerts are very useful to QA improvement

 

The TFS extensibility makes it a tool like no other. In my opinion, it's really worth, but you'll lose a lot of benefits if you do not have your proccess well defined. If you plan to have a process template for each project, you'll not be able to compare results for different projects.

 

regards,

 

Alex

 

 

On 2/1/07, David Christiansen <dc8948@yahoo.com> wrote:

makpot1975 <makpot1975@yahoo.com> wrote:

--- In parlezuml@yahoogroups.com, "jasongorman_uk" <jasongorman@...>
wrote:
>
> Has anyone out there had any experience with Visual Studio Team
> System? What features are you using, and what thoughts do you have
> about it? Good? Bad? Indifferent?
>
Hi jason,

Currently we are started using Team Sysytem and we are able to
successfully mapped it with Shrepoint. But though its giving good
features of VSS, MSP, Solution Explorer, Cutomise task queries,
etc...in one bundle, It seems not stable. We as a team we are using it
from last 3-4 months but sometime we may face problems like, it wont
get refreshed task assigned to team members quickly, which cuzes some
confusion. May be we need to become more handy to digest Team System.

Regards
Mak

 

---

Need Mail bonding?
Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.

Lots of buzz about BDD on various blogs at the moment - including
mine. What do people think of it? Is anyone out there dong it/trying it?

Jason Gorman
http://www.parlezuml.com

Folks

I'm planning a little experiment with Skype's new feature for
conferencing with larger groups of people. I thought I might invite
10-20 people to participate in a Skype discussion at 20:00 GMT on
Wednesday Feb 28th.

The format would be a quick intro from me and you could ask questions
about anything that's been bugging you - even about UML (imagine that!)

The cast would be recorded and maybe even turned into a podcast for
the entertainment of the 12 people who regularly visit the site ;-)

First question is: who would be interested in taking part? If you want
to participate - it would tae up maybe 45-60 minutes of your time -
then please drop me a line with your question (so I have a chance to
prepare an intelligent answer and make myself look much smarter than I
really am) and your skype ID so I can add you to the invite list.

Yours with his fingers crossed!

Jason

First of all, thanks for the UML for Java slide, it's pretty helpful.

And, now, to the topic. I have two questions about UML (or, OOP concept):
1. What is the difference between Abstract Class and Interface ?
2. On Page 63 of UML for Java Slide, the topmost diagram (Library and
Title). It's described as "Association" relationship. What I have in
mind is, it should be Composition/Aggregation relationship. Is it
correct if I put the Composition/Aggregation instead of Association ?
What is the difference between Association and Composition/Aggregation ?

Thanks.

----- Original Message -----

From: eon_strife

To: parlezuml@yahoogroups.com

Sent: 2007年3月30日 9:48 AM

Subject: [parlezuml] Question about Association

First of all, thanks for the UML for Java slide, it's pretty helpful.

And, now, to the topic. I have two questions about UML (or, OOP concept):
1. What is the difference between Abstract Class and Interface ?
2. On Page 63 of UML for Java Slide, the topmost diagram (Library and
Title). It's described as "Association" relationship. What I have in
mind is, it should be Composition/Aggregation relationship. Is it
correct if I put the Composition/Aggregation instead of Association ?
What is the difference between Association and Composition/Aggregation ?

Thanks.

First of all, thanks for the UML for Java slide, it's pretty helpful.

And, now, to the topic. I have two questions about UML (or, OOP concept):
1. What is the difference between Abstract Class and Interface ?
2. On Page 63 of UML for Java Slide, the topmost diagram (Library and
Title). It's described as "Association" relationship. What I have in
mind is, it should be Composition/Aggregation relationship. Is it
correct if I put the Composition/Aggregation instead of Association ?
What is the difference between Association and Composition/Aggregation ?

Thanks.

--- In parlezuml@yahoogroups.com, "eon_strife" <eon_strife@...> wrote:
>
> First of all, thanks for the UML for Java slide, it's pretty helpful.
>
You're welcome :-)

> 1. What is the difference between Abstract Class and Interface ?

I think others have answered this question already. An interface is a
pure abstraction where none of the methods declared have an
implementation.

> 2. On Page 63 of UML for Java Slide, the topmost diagram (Library and
> Title). It's described as "Association" relationship. What I have in
> mind is, it should be Composition/Aggregation relationship. Is it
> correct if I put the Composition/Aggregation instead of Association ?
> What is the difference between Association and Composition/Aggregation ?

Good question. I like to think of it in terms of the lifetimes of
objects that are related.

If one object is composed of other objects, then they cannot live
beyond the lifetime of their container. Aggregation is a weaker form
of the container->contained relationship where the contained objects
can live beyond the life of their container (and can be shared/swapped
among other containers - e.g. your computer's components).

An association is a weaker relationship that doesn't imply containment
of any kind, but most modelers tend to use it by default - mainly
because it's a little quicker to draw.

To a programmer, aggregation and association mean the same thing, in
so much as you'd write the same code.

What kind of relationship is library->title? From an analysis
perspective, it's a little fuzzy. I suspect the best guess would be
aggregation, in so much as a title can outlive the library that
contains it.

Hope that makes things a little less clear!

Regards

Jason Gorman
http://www.parlezuml.com

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the parlezuml
group.

   File        : /Audio 2_03.mp3
   Uploaded by : jasongorman_uk <jasongorman@...>
   Description : parlezuml.com Podcast Jingle

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/parlezuml/files/Audio%202_03.mp3

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

jasongorman_uk <jasongorman@...>

The podcast is still in "pre-production", but I've uploaded the main
jingle/theme to the Files section for those of you who like a good
laugh :-)

Good/Rubbish/Indifferent? Yes, it was made by my own fair hands on
this very laptop. I was going for a holiday program vibe...

Jason Gorman
http://www.parlezuml.com

Thanks for the info, guys. After reading your comments and some books,
I have come to a conclusion regarding the difference between
Aggregation, Composition, and Association :
1. Aggregation : The object is created inside the container. When the
container is destroyed, the object is too (Dunno if it works in Java
too. If I'm not wrong, everything in Java is by reference.).
Furthermore, the object can't be attached to another container.
2. Composition : The object is created independently in the outside
(or maybe inside another container), it can be put and removed from
any container at will as it's only by reference.
3. Association : Like guillaume said, it's used for a while, and never
put into any container.

I wonder, is everything in Java by reference ? I mean, we create a new
object (call it A) inside an object (call it B). For all the time, A
is inside B (aggregation). Right after B is about to be destroyed,
another object C, makes a reference to A. So, is the reference still
valid after B is destroyed (since A should be destroyed with it) ? In
that sense, does the relationship A have is aggregation or composition ?

--- In parlezuml@yahoogroups.com, "Guillaume BERTRAND"
<guillaume.bertrand@...> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
>
>
> From a programming perspective, I would differentiate aggregation and
> association as such:
>
>
>
> begin class CLASS_1
>
> // whatever
>
> end class CLASS_1
>
>
>
> begin class CLASS_2
>
> // whatever too
>
> end class CLASS_2
>
>
>
> begin class CLASS_3
>
>
>
>             // this is a reference we keep; therefore an aggregation
>
>             var AGGREGATION of type CLASS_2
>
>
>
>             // this method uses a reference which is passed to it;
it is a
> simple association
>
>             begin method DO_SOMETHING ( var COMPOSITION of type
CLASS_1 )
>
>
>
>             end method DO_SOMETHING
>
>
>
> end class CLASS_3
>
>
>
>
>
> Comments welcome!
>
>
>
> Guillaume.
>
>
>
> http://www.guillaumebertrand.com <http://www.guillaumebertrand.com/>
>
> http://blog.guillaumebertrand.com <http://blog.guillaumebertrand.com/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> From: parlezuml@yahoogroups.com [mailto:parlezuml@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf
> Of jasongorman_uk
> Sent: 02 April 2007 07:33
> To: parlezuml@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [parlezuml] Re: Question about Association
>
>
>
> --- In parlezuml@yahoogrou <mailto:parlezuml%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com,
> "eon_strife" <eon_strife@> wrote:
> >
> > First of all, thanks for the UML for Java slide, it's pretty helpful.
> >
> You're welcome :-)
>
> > 1. What is the difference between Abstract Class and Interface ?
>
> I think others have answered this question already. An interface is a
> pure abstraction where none of the methods declared have an
> implementation.
>
> > 2. On Page 63 of UML for Java Slide, the topmost diagram (Library and
> > Title). It's described as "Association" relationship. What I have in
> > mind is, it should be Composition/Aggregation relationship. Is it
> > correct if I put the Composition/Aggregation instead of Association ?
> > What is the difference between Association and
Composition/Aggregation ?
>
> Good question. I like to think of it in terms of the lifetimes of
> objects that are related.
>
> If one object is composed of other objects, then they cannot live
> beyond the lifetime of their container. Aggregation is a weaker form
> of the container->contained relationship where the contained objects
> can live beyond the life of their container (and can be shared/swapped
> among other containers - e.g. your computer's components).
>
> An association is a weaker relationship that doesn't imply containment
> of any kind, but most modelers tend to use it by default - mainly
> because it's a little quicker to draw.
>
> To a programmer, aggregation and association mean the same thing, in
> so much as you'd write the same code.
>
> What kind of relationship is library->title? From an analysis
> perspective, it's a little fuzzy. I suspect the best guess would be
> aggregation, in so much as a title can outlive the library that
> contains it.
>
> Hope that makes things a little less clear!
>
> Regards
>
> Jason Gorman
> http://www.parlezum <http://www.parlezuml.com> l.com
>

Hi,
My bad, I made a mistake, switching Aggregation to Composition :(

OK, thanks for the help, guys :)

--- In parlezuml@yahoogroups.com, "Guillaume BERTRAND"
<guillaume.bertrand@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I think you messed up the definitions for 1 and 2, otherwise, it is
pretty
> much that.
>
>
>
> On the programming side, be it Java or any other language, you have to
> remember that it is the intent that's important: you may intend to do
> composition within a class, but if another class manages to get a
reference
> to your composing objects (through introspection for instance),
you're right
> to think that it will now be an aggregation.
>
> However, that would probably mean that either your design or your
> implementation is wrong. make sure that this kind of discrepancy doesn't
> happen; I can see memory leaks here!
>
>
>
> Guillaume.
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> From: parlezuml@yahoogroups.com [mailto:parlezuml@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf
> Of eon_strife
> Sent: 11 April 2007 13:26
> To: parlezuml@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [parlezuml] Re: Question about Association
>
>
>
> Thanks for the info, guys. After reading your comments and some books,
> I have come to a conclusion regarding the difference between
> Aggregation, Composition, and Association :
> 1. Aggregation : The object is created inside the container. When the
> container is destroyed, the object is too (Dunno if it works in Java
> too. If I'm not wrong, everything in Java is by reference.).
> Furthermore, the object can't be attached to another container.
> 2. Composition : The object is created independently in the outside
> (or maybe inside another container), it can be put and removed from
> any container at will as it's only by reference.
> 3. Association : Like guillaume said, it's used for a while, and never
> put into any container.
>
> I wonder, is everything in Java by reference ? I mean, we create a new
> object (call it A) inside an object (call it B). For all the time, A
> is inside B (aggregation). Right after B is about to be destroyed,
> another object C, makes a reference to A. So, is the reference still
> valid after B is destroyed (since A should be destroyed with it) ? In
> that sense, does the relationship A have is aggregation or composition ?
>
> --- In parlezuml@yahoogrou <mailto:parlezuml%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com,
> "Guillaume BERTRAND"
> <guillaume.bertrand@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> >
> >
> > From a programming perspective, I would differentiate aggregation and
> > association as such:
> >
> >
> >
> > begin class CLASS_1
> >
> > // whatever
> >
> > end class CLASS_1
> >
> >
> >
> > begin class CLASS_2
> >
> > // whatever too
> >
> > end class CLASS_2
> >
> >
> >
> > begin class CLASS_3
> >
> >
> >
> > // this is a reference we keep; therefore an aggregation
> >
> > var AGGREGATION of type CLASS_2
> >
> >
> >
> > // this method uses a reference which is passed to it;
> it is a
> > simple association
> >
> > begin method DO_SOMETHING ( var COMPOSITION of type
> CLASS_1 )
> >
> >
> >
> > end method DO_SOMETHING
> >
> >
> >
> > end class CLASS_3
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Comments welcome!
> >
> >
> >
> > Guillaume.
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.guillaum <http://www.guillaumebertrand.com> ebertrand.com
> <http://www.guillaum <http://www.guillaumebertrand.com/>
ebertrand.com/>
> >
> > http://blog. <http://blog.guillaumebertrand.com> guillaumebertrand.com
> <http://blog. <http://blog.guillaumebertrand.com/>
guillaumebertrand.com/>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _____
> >
> > From: parlezuml@yahoogrou <mailto:parlezuml%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com
> [mailto:parlezuml@yahoogrou <mailto:parlezuml%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com]
> On Behalf
> > Of jasongorman_uk
> > Sent: 02 April 2007 07:33
> > To: parlezuml@yahoogrou <mailto:parlezuml%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com
> > Subject: [parlezuml] Re: Question about Association
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In parlezuml@yahoogrou <mailto:parlezuml%40yahoogroups.com>
ps.com,
> > "eon_strife" <eon_strife@> wrote:
> > >
> > > First of all, thanks for the UML for Java slide, it's pretty
helpful.
> > >
> > You're welcome :-)
> >
> > > 1. What is the difference between Abstract Class and Interface ?
> >
> > I think others have answered this question already. An interface is a
> > pure abstraction where none of the methods declared have an
> > implementation.
> >
> > > 2. On Page 63 of UML for Java Slide, the topmost diagram
(Library and
> > > Title). It's described as "Association" relationship. What I have in
> > > mind is, it should be Composition/Aggregation relationship. Is it
> > > correct if I put the Composition/Aggregation instead of
Association ?
> > > What is the difference between Association and
> Composition/Aggregation ?
> >
> > Good question. I like to think of it in terms of the lifetimes of
> > objects that are related.
> >
> > If one object is composed of other objects, then they cannot live
> > beyond the lifetime of their container. Aggregation is a weaker form
> > of the container->contained relationship where the contained objects
> > can live beyond the life of their container (and can be shared/swapped
> > among other containers - e.g. your computer's components).
> >
> > An association is a weaker relationship that doesn't imply containment
> > of any kind, but most modelers tend to use it by default - mainly
> > because it's a little quicker to draw.
> >
> > To a programmer, aggregation and association mean the same thing, in
> > so much as you'd write the same code.
> >
> > What kind of relationship is library->title? From an analysis
> > perspective, it's a little fuzzy. I suspect the best guess would be
> > aggregation, in so much as a title can outlive the library that
> > contains it.
> >
> > Hope that makes things a little less clear!
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Jason Gorman
> > http://www.parlezum <http://www.parlezum
<http://www.parlezuml.com> l.com>
> l.com
> >
>

Wait a minute, check this :
http://www.jubatus.com/publications/articles/understandingumlclassrelationships/\
understandingumlclassrelationships.htm

According to this, Guillaume's previous example, should be dependency,
not association. Then, what is an association ?

Seems that the site agrees with Jasongorman that Association and
Aggregation in the essence is the same...

Oh, my, this is pretty confusing now...A clear line must be drawn...

--- In parlezuml@yahoogroups.com, "eon_strife" <eon_strife@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> My bad, I made a mistake, switching Aggregation to Composition :(
>
> OK, thanks for the help, guys :)
>
> --- In parlezuml@yahoogroups.com, "Guillaume BERTRAND"
> <guillaume.bertrand@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > I think you messed up the definitions for 1 and 2, otherwise, it is
> pretty
> > much that.
> >
> >
> >
> > On the programming side, be it Java or any other language, you have to
> > remember that it is the intent that's important: you may intend to do
> > composition within a class, but if another class manages to get a
> reference
> > to your composing objects (through introspection for instance),
> you're right
> > to think that it will now be an aggregation.
> >
> > However, that would probably mean that either your design or your
> > implementation is wrong. make sure that this kind of discrepancy
doesn't
> > happen; I can see memory leaks here!
> >
> >
> >
> > Guillaume.
> >
> >
> >
> >   _____
> >
> > From: parlezuml@yahoogroups.com [mailto:parlezuml@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf
> > Of eon_strife
> > Sent: 11 April 2007 13:26
> > To: parlezuml@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [parlezuml] Re: Question about Association
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the info, guys. After reading your comments and some books,
> > I have come to a conclusion regarding the difference between
> > Aggregation, Composition, and Association :
> > 1. Aggregation : The object is created inside the container. When the
> > container is destroyed, the object is too (Dunno if it works in Java
> > too. If I'm not wrong, everything in Java is by reference.).
> > Furthermore, the object can't be attached to another container.
> > 2. Composition : The object is created independently in the outside
> > (or maybe inside another container), it can be put and removed from
> > any container at will as it's only by reference.
> > 3. Association : Like guillaume said, it's used for a while, and never
> > put into any container.
> >
> > I wonder, is everything in Java by reference ? I mean, we create a new
> > object (call it A) inside an object (call it B). For all the time, A
> > is inside B (aggregation). Right after B is about to be destroyed,
> > another object C, makes a reference to A. So, is the reference still
> > valid after B is destroyed (since A should be destroyed with it) ? In
> > that sense, does the relationship A have is aggregation or
composition ?
> >
> > --- In parlezuml@yahoogrou <mailto:parlezuml%40yahoogroups.com>
ps.com,
> > "Guillaume BERTRAND"
> > <guillaume.bertrand@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From a programming perspective, I would differentiate
aggregation and
> > > association as such:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > begin class CLASS_1
> > >
> > > // whatever
> > >
> > > end class CLASS_1
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > begin class CLASS_2
> > >
> > > // whatever too
> > >
> > > end class CLASS_2
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > begin class CLASS_3
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > // this is a reference we keep; therefore an aggregation
> > >
> > > var AGGREGATION of type CLASS_2
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > // this method uses a reference which is passed to it;
> > it is a
> > > simple association
> > >
> > > begin method DO_SOMETHING ( var COMPOSITION of type
> > CLASS_1 )
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > end method DO_SOMETHING
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > end class CLASS_3
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Comments welcome!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Guillaume.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.guillaum <http://www.guillaumebertrand.com> ebertrand.com
> > <http://www.guillaum <http://www.guillaumebertrand.com/>
> ebertrand.com/>
> > >
> > > http://blog. <http://blog.guillaumebertrand.com>
guillaumebertrand.com
> > <http://blog. <http://blog.guillaumebertrand.com/>
> guillaumebertrand.com/>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _____

>
> Seems that the site agrees with Jasongorman that Association and
> Aggregation in the essence is the same...
>

I really meant that a programmer would write the same code (in a
language like Java or C#) to implement both.

They'd have different meanings to an analyst, though :-)

Just another example of UML analysis concepts that don't map onto OO code!

Jason Gorman
http://www.parlezuml.com

Hi

Just a quick drum roll for an upcoming public course that experienced
developers and architects will, I think, find challenging and rewarding.

It'll be held in London on June 11th-14th (4 days) and advertised
places are £1,100 (+ VAT).

Details are posted at http://www.parlezuml.com/training/agiledesign.htm

This blog post explains it a little less formally -
http://parlezuml.com/blog/?postid=396

Hope to maybe see some of you there

Warm regards

Jason Gorman
http://www.parlezuml.com
+44 208 715 2645

Folks

You can finally listen to the pilot parlezuml.com podcast. Details are
here - http://parlezuml.com/blog/?postid=394

Hurrah!

Jason Gorman
http://www.parlezuml.com

Hi,
From what I read, in Prototype Pattern part, it's said that if
creating new object is constly, we should use clone. But, from what I
see, using new and using clone should be...same. Both of them
instantiate new object. So, what's the difference in term of performance ?

Thanks.

Hi Folks

I'm taking a straw poll to help me decide what topics I might cover in
the book I'm planning.

I know you're all busy people, but I would really appreciate it if you
could take a minute to take the poll - literally 60 seconds. Just
follow this link and select the topics that would interest you most:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=315153835926

There's room for another 94 responses. I would be delighted if they
all got used up :-)

Many thanks

Jason Gorman
http://www.parlezuml.com