NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #19/NN_1992_19.iso/spool/comp/object/3405

Text File | 1992-09-03 | 1.7 KB | 52 lines

Newsgroups: comp.object
Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!darwin.sura.net!mlb.semi.harris.com!dw3g.ess.harris.com!smccoy
From: [e-mail] (Scott McCoy)
Subject: Re: DFDs come naturally
References:  <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 12:44:42 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host: dw3g.ess.harris.com
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Scott McCoy)
Organization: Harris Corporation Information Systems Division
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 38

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve
Morris) writes:
|>
|>I have some background in OO techniques. However, every time I
|>start
|>to analyze a system via diagrams, I naturally (i.e.
|>not-consciously)
|>start to draw a data-flow diagram.
|>
|>I don't necessarily say to myself... "Today, I'm going to use
|>structured analysis". It just comes out that way.
|>
|>Has anyone else experienced this?
|>
|>To those of you who use OOA; does your OOA method come naturally
|>or do you consciously apply it?
|>
|>
|>--
|>Steve Morris  ||  MATRIX Corp.  ||  919-231-8000 (8001 FAX) ||
|>[e-mail]
|>

I have the same problem: when I see bubbles and flows, I also think of
DFD's.  I think that is a serious failing point (IMHO) of some of the
CASE tools which market 'OO' support, but really just provide a
re-packaged DFD tool.

Old habits are hard to break.

Try an OO methodology which does not use bubbles and flows
(Coad/Yourdon comes to mind -- works "naturally" for me).

--
Scott McCoy    Harris ISD    Opinions expressed are my own.
        Internet:     [e-mail]
        Voice   :     [phone]
        FAX     :     [phone]