Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 20:46 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
General Development I like this one: "By definition, a program is an entity that is run by the computer. It talks directly to the CPU and the OS. Code that does not talk directly to the CPU and the OS, but is instead run by some other program that does talk directly to the CPU and the OS, is not a program; it's a script." Here's the other eleven.
Thread beginning with comment 533944
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: OOPs
by lucas_maximus on Wed 5th Sep 2012 12:44 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: OOPs"
lucas_maximus
Member since:
2009-08-18

Strangely, I think UML class diagrams are perhaps the most useless UML diagram. They're pain to make, class design changes all the time, and thus they're a pain to update.


The IDE can be be configured to provide a set.

I don't use them for large projects with several thousand files, I used them as documentation for a particular component or set of components.

They don't necessarily have to be totally up-2-date. As long as I see how the classes fit together it is better than "Find All References" in VS and trying to fit it all together in my head.

Regarding flow diagrams, I find UML sequence diagrams to be a better replacement.


For non-technical people such as Project Managers or a Higher a flow diagram is quite easy to understand.

For me, the trick with UML and any diagramming language is not to go into any detail. Anything more than a brief outline is even more ridiculous to maintain and keep accurate than code itself.


I mostly work with .NET and Front End Web Tech. I find UML mostly redundant for what I do unless it is specifying either class diagrams or part of the ORM for the Data Access Layer.

Reply Parent Score: 3