Unlike with UML, in DSM we
stopped modeling when the application was ready. If the application needs to be
modi?¬?ed, we do it in the model.
For the DSM case, we left the code out of the scenario since it is not so relevant
anymore. This is in sharp contrast to the UML approach, where the modeling
constructs originate from the code constructs. Naturally in DSM code is also
generated, but since the generator is de?¬?ned by the developers of the DSM language
and not by the developers of this particular mobile application, we won??™t inspect the
implementation in code here. Later in Part III of this book we look at examples of
DSM in more detail, including this mobile application case.
1.3.3 Comparing UML and DSM
The above example illustrates several key differences between general-purpose and
Domain-Speci?¬?c Modeling languages. Do the comparison yourself and think about
the following questions:
. Which of these two is a faster way to develop the application?
. Which leads to better quality?
. Which language guided the modeler in developing a working application?
. Which speci?¬?cations are easier to read and understand?
. Which requires less modeling work?
. Which approach detects errors earlier or even prevents them from happening?
. Which language is easier to introduce and learn?
No doubt, DSM performed better compared to UML or any other generalpurpose
language.
Pages:
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46