"Reasonable programming languages" for UML 1.5

From: Boris (boris_at_gtemail.net)
Date: 12/21/03 

Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 20:23:24 +0100

The UML 1.5 spec says that "UML must and can support all reasonable
programming languages". (page 1-5) Does anyone know if there is a deeper
meaning of "reasonable programming languages" for UML?

Boris

Relevant Pages

  • Re: UML and COBOL
    ... > Contrary to what people believe, UML doesn't have to be solely applied ... It's very relevant even when considering non-OO ... > programming languages, such as COBOL. ... Prev by Date: ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: UML and COBOL
    ... > Contrary to what people believe, UML doesn't have to be solely applied ... It's very relevant even when considering non-OO ... > programming languages, such as COBOL. ... Prev by Date: ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: UML and COBOL
    ... UML doesn't have to be solely applied ... It's very relevant even when considering non-OO ... programming languages, such as COBOL. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • UML notation question
    ... If in a UML class diagram I have: ... Meaning that A generalizes B, which generalizes C. Can I write: ... Adam ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: [RFC] add struct hw_interrupt_type->release
    ... > presumably meaning the shutdown/disable is only done when the very ... How exactly is UML using hardirqs, ... Maybe UML would be better off to not use hardirqs at all, ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
    (Linux-Kernel)