I am evaluating BridgePoint xtUML right now. I have only been using it for a week. Any experience you want to share (good and bad) is appreciated.
USER FORUM TOPIC Mentor Graphics BridgePoint xtUML
by | Mar 18, 2011 | Uncategorized | 10 comments
I am evaluating BridgePoint xtUML right now. I have only been using it for a week. Any experience you want to share (good and bad) is appreciated.
Hi Leslie,
I have always been curious about the same thing.
I hope you will be able to report back here after spending some time with the tool.
Also, would you mind disclosing what kind of application you plan to build with it and what aspects are more important to you?
Sorry for not being able to help.
Thanks,
Rafael
I’ve got a long love-hate relationship WITH BridgePoint / xtUML since the early days (early 90’s – before the Eclipse version). I have worked on many projects as a consultant using BridgePoint, generating production code on a wide variety of embedded and RT/distributed projects. It works, and it works well.
If you want to do Articulate UML (express application specific rules / platform independent modeling) and generate efficient embedded/RT code, it’s the way TO go. The code gen IS based ON SOME solid theory that provides astounding flexibility FROM PIM TO PSM. You can even run your models AND test them without HAVING TO WRITE ANY code.
By contrast, if you want TO do UML that maps closely TO the code (draw pictures OF your code) THEN something LIKE Rhapsody IS probably better.
Now, FOR the hate part,… the UI has always sucked. The visualization tools (sequence diagrams) have always been substandard. That said – you can always find other tools TO fill those gaps. Plus there ARE various ways you can instrument the generated code TO CREATE nice sequence diagrams. But out OF the box support IS NOT impressive.
Despite the ‘hate’ part, it IS still my tool OF choice FOR generating quality code FROM truly platform independent models.
That’s my opinion. – Leon (leon_starr /address/ modelint.com)
I’ve also used the tool FOR a long TIME, but NOT AS long AS Leon. I actually liked the old USER interface better than a lot OF the newer IDE based ones, but the push-button compiler IN the new Eclipse-based interface IS sure a lot nicer.
As Leon alluded TO, BridgePoint IS specifically targeted AT the xtUML/Executable UML/Shlaer-Mellor (ALL the same thing) method USER. If you ARE USING the Executable UML method, BridgePoint IS a very good tool. The model verifier will save you a lot OF TIME IN verification, because you will have a fully verified DOMAIN before you generate code. The drawback IS that if you ARE unfamiliar WITH the method, you will have a learning curve. If you don’t have Leon’s book, How TO Build Class Models, GET it! It’ll save you a lot of time on the learning curve. (No. I don’t GET kick-backs FROM Leon.) Another thing that would benefit the evaluation would be TO bring IN a consultant. I was unable TO sell this course OF ACTION AT my place OF employment, so I had TO learn the hard way: books, papers FROM the Executable UML product vendors, AND the now defunct Shlaer-Mellor Users GROUP mailing list. We did have a week OF training FROM Leon, AND I used TO WORK WITH Cortland Starrett, who wrote the Mentor Graphics’ MC-3020 C model compiler. Cort introduced me to Shlaer-Mellor.
Let me tell you about some resources. There is are two Yahoo! groups run by Marc Balcer, Executable UML and Executable UML Tools. I’ve started two LinkedIn groups; one IS FOR networking ONLY, AND one IS OPEN FOR ANY TYPE OF conversation. The websites WITH papers available ARE Mentor Graphics, Abstract Solutions (formerly Kennedy-Carter), Pathfinder Solutions, Model Integration (Leon’s company), and Kavanagh Consulting (OOA Tool).
Hi,
Can you tell us what are the LinkedIn groups you mention in your post?
Thanks
Executable UML – networking
Executable UML Q&A – general (open)
They are the only two that turn up when searching for “executable uml” in groups.
I bought Leon’s book. Thanks for the tip!
Have you ever compiled one Component of a system into C++ and another Component of the same system into SystemC?
I have to figure out how complex my user-defined data types can be. Structured data types can be nested and I don’t know the limits OF the compiler.
Your comments ARE welcome!
Leslie
I’ve ONLY used the C model compiler IN my WORK. You should ask this question OF Mentor Graphics; they’ve always been very helpful in my experience. I would expect the multiple compilation to be possible.
FWIW, I don’t believe IN USING structured DATA types, but I can understand WHERE it might be necessary. One OF the things that I haven’t seen handled properly by the Executable UML tools is what the (Mellor-Balcer) Executable UML book refers to as “composite” data types. An example, from the Executable UML book, is the user-defined type, mailing address, in the on-line bookstore example. The on-line bookstore domain doesn’t ever use street address, state, zipcode, etc. explicitly, but it does want a mailing address attached TO the Order class. (Hopefully, I’m remembering the class name correctly.) If it needed to access the internals of mailing address, then it would be modeled as a class within the domain.
IOW, if the members of the structure need to be accessed within the domain, then the structure should be modeled as a class. Nested structures would be multiple classes and associations.
There are times when only one or two data elements are needed from an external (to the domain) data composition. One could model that as a class with attributes for the one or two interesting (to the domain) data elements and a composite data attribute for the remainder, pass the data in through a domain function with parameters for the one or two elements and a parameter for the remainder, or call a bridge function to extract the elements and return them to the domain.
My employer wants me to compare Rhapsody and BridgePoint for Systems Modeling. Right now, the company uses Rhapsody for software development (with limited modeling).
Rhapsody does not have a SystemC compiler, which is what is needed for Components that are targeted for hardware.
Criteria to judge Rhapsody:
architectural exploration: this is the most important
requirements tracing (Rhapsody Gateway: had bad experience several yrs ago)
compiling the model with timing constraints
customer support (my experience with the IBM team is abysmal)
support of complex data types
Your input is greatly appreciated!
Leslie
Hi,
I joined the first one but the other is almost empty. Have you considered merging both groups?
Jordi
No. They serve two different purposes. I started the first to limit the conversations to experienced Executable UML developers. I only started the second, because inexperienced developers or developers wanting to create method vs. method discussions didn’t seem TO be inclined TO go TO the Yahoo! groups.