This material was briefly covered during lectures on March 14, ; this page describes Coad and Yourdon's method - particularly, the design evaluation criteria it provides - in more detail than in the lecture. Coad and Yourdon's method for object-oriented design appeared shortly after their method for object-oriented analysis , and it seems clear that they're intended to be used together. This might possibly make their method easier to use than other current methods - but, on the other hand, it seems possible that it could also limit the types of systems to which it could be applied. This method is also discussed, more briefly, in recent editions of Pressman's Software Engineering: A Practitioner's Approach.

Author:Goltikinos Shakakree
Language:English (Spanish)
Published (Last):8 May 2004
PDF File Size:8.59 Mb
ePub File Size:8.74 Mb
Price:Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]

By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Cookie Policy , Privacy Policy , and our Terms of Service. Software Engineering Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professionals, academics, and students working within the systems development life cycle.

It only takes a minute to sign up. Typically, a subject would represent the top level of a gen-spec or a whole-part class tree. For this reason, subject diagrams are useful as a 'top-level' view to guide the programmer through to more detailed class diagrams for each 'subject' area. This would be a useful analytical approach for a project I am currently working on it is a rather large problem domain. In the book, a notation is suggested for use along with the analysis approach as it was recognised that an analytical method needs a supporting notation for it to be practical.

My first thought was for component diagrams , but I have always viewed components as principally an implementation concern rather than part of the problem domain. Whilst the component definitions will usually coincide with natural divisions in the problem domain, it seems incorrect to be talking about interfaces etc.

I also considered package diagrams but this also seems inappropriate. I use package diagrams as part of deciding how the components are to be grouped in terms of the source code repositories; this is closely related to my deployment strategy as each package will be intended for deployment to a particular server.

There's no specific granularity for a block - it could be another system, a subsystem, component, class, and so on. If you want to stay within UML, I wouldn't dismiss package diagrams so quickly. What you are describing could be viewed, from one perspective, as a "package". Scott Ambler's discussion of package diagrams in Agile Modeling supports this perspective, as well.

Personally, I don't have a problem mixing notations. In IEEE , which defines standards for describing software system designs, designs are captured from various viewpoints.

A viewpoint shows the design from the perspective of a particular stakeholder, using one or more views. Views can be in any form, but are usually graphical and sometimes tabular with supporting text. The standard says that "only standardized and well-established i. If your audience will understand the Coad-Yourdon notation or you can point them toward a reference source that they can easily obtain, use that notation.

Sign up to join this community. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top. Home Questions Tags Users Unanswered. Asked 4 years, 3 months ago. Active 4 years, 2 months ago. Viewed times. Considerations thus far My first thought was for component diagrams , but I have always viewed components as principally an implementation concern rather than part of the problem domain.

Marvin Marvin 5 5 silver badges 15 15 bronze badges. Active Oldest Votes. I don't have any particular aversion to mixed notations; as long as complexity is minimised. Sign up or log in Sign up using Google. Sign up using Facebook. Sign up using Email and Password. Post as a guest Name.

Email Required, but never shown. The Overflow Blog. Podcast JavaScript is ready to get its own place. Featured on Meta.

What posts should be escalated to staff using [status-review], and how do I…. We're switching to CommonMark. Related 5. Hot Network Questions. Question feed.


Components of a Class Diagram

Unfortunately, while Coad and Yourdon's pictures look nice, they aren't particularly easy to draw. A class is a description of one or more objects that have a uniform set of attributes and services, together with a description of how to create new objects in the class. Note that almost the same list was given for things in the problem domain that might be modeled by entities on an entity-relationship diagram. Indeed, a class does correspond, loosely, to an entity in an entity-relationship diagram. On the other hand, there are some significant differences between classes in an object-oriented specification, and entities in an entity-relationship diagram. The most important of these are probably the following; more will be mentioned later. Indeed, while classes usually do represent stored data, it's occasionally possible for a class to represent none at all, because it supports essential operations, instead.


Derivation Of Object Model Coad Methodology

Object-oriented Analysis. Object-oriented analysis starts with a traditional structured specification, and adds the following information:. A list of all objects - A list describing the data contents of each noun , or physical entities in the DFD. A list all system behaviors - A list of all verbs within the process names such as Prepare order summary report, generate invoices, etc. A list of the associate the primary behaviors services with each object - Each object will have behaviors which uniquely belong to the object. Other objects may request the behavior of the object.



Related Articles