Re: Alloy paper



Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Alan Cameron Wills (alan@trireme.com)
Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:28:24 +0100


Daniel Jackson wrote: > substantial case for why it's worth considering a new language despite the > standardization of UML. How should we go about getting the ideas in this contribution (and others like it) used by the programming community? I believe that: * There is little hope of replacing UML --- there are too many people and businesses already signed up to it. * Even if there were no UML, there would be so many contenders for "best" modelling language that we would spend all our time in debate about the virtues of them all, rather than getting down to using them. The strategy most likely to get some of our best ideas really used in widespread practice, is to gradually shove them into UML. My guess is that this will be true for about 10 years. I feel it is worth working on best-imaginable languages like Alloy, in order to experiment with and demonstrate techniques. But the next task is to migrate the ideas embodied in them incrementally into the (very imperfect) language that everyone is actually using. Alan Cameron Wills Trireme International Ltd Catalysis: objects, components and frameworks in UML


Date view Thread view Subject view Author view