Re: ocl conformance test



Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

From: Steffen Zschaler (sz9@inf.tu-dresden.de)
Date: Thu 12 Feb 2004 - 09:45:01 GMT


This seems to be putting the barrier pretty low. Any OCL tool will need 
to be able to access UML models in some manner. The two standard 
approaches would be either by accessing some kind of model repository or 
by reading in XMI files.In the latter case the ability to read in XMI 
files is implicitly given, while in the former case most UML 
repositories support filling the repository from an XMI file. So, I 
think its a pretty low barrier already to be able to read in XMI files. 
As for the second XML file: Its structure is so simple, that it should 
be possible to write a parser in very little time.

Regards,

Steffen Zschaler

Jrn Guy S schrieb:

>I agree, but your approach tacitly assumes that tools will be able to read XMI-Files and (moreover) extract the statements from them. IMO this is rather the exception than the rule.
>
>Regards, JGS
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From:	puml-list-request@cs.york.ac.uk [mailto:puml-list-request@cs.york.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Stefan Haustein
>Sent:	Wednesday, February 11, 2004 2:46 PM
>To:	puml-list@cs.york.ac.uk
>Subject:	Re: ocl conformance test
>
>Jrn Guy S wrote:
>  
>
>>Of course you are right in that a conformance test suite would greatly improve quality 
>>    
>>
> > and comparability among parsers/interpreters for OCL. The impediment here is 
>that currently
> > no standardized interface to OCL parsers/interpreters is available, so no 
>automatic compliance
> > testing can be performed. I have initiated an effort to develop such 
>interface following UML2003,
> > but as of now there is almost no progress. IMHO, as long as there is no such 
>interface,
> > comparability OCL parsers will not be achievable and thus implementation of 
>such parsers
> > remains a scientific niche activity that does not yield reusable components. 
>If you would like
> > to invest your time in a standardization effort, the results would probably 
>make a great difference.
>
>Hi Jrn,
>
>as a starting point, why have not an XMI file describing a simple class and 
>object diagram and an XML file with a set of test expressions:
>
><oclTest model="Test.xmi">
>  <group name="Collection">
>   <group name="Sets">
>    <test>
>     <expression>Set{3,2,2,1}</expression>
>     <result>Set{1,2,3}</result>
>    </test>
>    <test>
>     <expression>Set{3,2,1}-&gt;select(x|x>1)</expression>
>     <result>Set{2,3}</result>
>    </test>
>   </group>
>  </group>
></ocltest>
>
>Support for this kind of tests is probably simple to implement on top of 
>existing OCL tools. This would allow some shared basic tests without a 
>standardized interface to the OCL parsers/interpreters,and I think it would be 
>at least more useful than "nothing"?
>
>Best regards,
>Stefan Haustein
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>To remove yourself from this list please mail puml-list-request@cs.york.ac.uk
>with a message containing the word "unsubscribe".
>
>
>
>
>
>To remove yourself from this list please mail puml-list-request@cs.york.ac.uk
>with a message containing the word "unsubscribe".
>
>  
>

-- 
Dipl.-Inf. Steffen Zschaler
Research Assistant

Dresden University of Technology
Department of Computer Science

Phone +49 351 463 38555
Fax   +49 351 463 38459
Email Steffen.Zschaler@inf.tu-dresden.de

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view