Using one design class to manage each use case?
From: Ken (kk_oop_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 10/30/03
- Previous message: Ken: "IPC in Sequence Diagrams?"
- Next in thread: Phlip: "Re: Using one design class to manage each use case?"
- Reply: Phlip: "Re: Using one design class to manage each use case?"
- Reply: H. S. Lahman: "Re: Using one design class to manage each use case?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 30 Oct 2003 05:41:26 -0800
Hi. I recently posted a general question about robustness analyses
classes. After getting a lot of good response, I wanted to ask a
follow up, more specific question, but I didn't want it to get lost in
the middle of the other thread. So here it is:
I'd like to see opinions about having a seperate controller/manager
design class for each use case. In other words, if there were an air
traffic control system that had a use case called "Send altitude
change request to aircraft," I would actually implement a class called
something like Altitude Change Request Manager. The sequence details
of the use case would be encapsulated in this class. It would then
make use of other classes to get its job done. It would also be
triggered by a boundary class responsible for receiving
messages/requests from outside actors (ie., it would not have any comm
protocol details).
Any opinions would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
Ken
- Previous message: Ken: "IPC in Sequence Diagrams?"
- Next in thread: Phlip: "Re: Using one design class to manage each use case?"
- Reply: Phlip: "Re: Using one design class to manage each use case?"
- Reply: H. S. Lahman: "Re: Using one design class to manage each use case?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|