Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'uml'.
Here is a question I am pondering: The UML specification defines ParameterDirectionKind (7.3.43 in the V2.4.1 superstructure specification, available at omg.org) for an operation defined on a class. The description there is: "ParameterDirectionKind is an enumeration of the following literal values: • in Indicates that parameter values are passed into the behavioral element by the caller. • inout Indicates that parameter values are passed into a behavioral element by the caller and then back out to the caller from the behavioral element. • out Indicates that parameter values are passed from a behavioral element out to the caller. • return Indicates that parameter values are passed as return values from a behavioral element back to the caller." So, do we model the outputs of a LabVIEW class method (VI) with the "out" or "return" direction? I decided long ago to use "out" and never "return" for a number of reasons (some theoretical, some practical: "inout" does make sense, after all; many languages support only one return value, although this is a design choice), and I delete "void" for the return type in the operation prototype since I regard that as meaningless for LabVIEW. I still think that is the best approach, but I'm not certain that I have the most rigorous explanation, and of course I could be wrong altogether. Thoughts? Paul
We are completing the last minor systems on the Discovery Channel Telescope, and I am looking forward to the next venture, wherever it will be. My ideal next move would be to design and implement an even larger, more complex system. (The control component template I developed here and, more importantly, the concepts therein are readily scalable and directly applicable to pretty much any type of control system.) I think the DCT software system is an amazingly powerful, robust, and elegant software system! I am looking forward to building the next incredible system! res Oct 2012.docx