[erlang-questions] ExecutableUML and Erlang
Thu Feb 16 15:55:28 CET 2012
Ulf has already covered most of it but I can add that I have also seen a
demo and presentation of this and it is certainly nothing
that we working with Erlang gets impressed by or even think is a good idea.
As Ulf pointed out xtUML is on lower abstraction level than Erlang, my
impression was that if the tool used Erlang as the
xtUML it would be much better.
I also think that the graphics is nice and fun as long as you have small
toy examples which fits nicely on the screen.
In summary I think textual programming in Erlang (possibly with a tool
which can give a graphical view of processes etc) is
much better. Additionally a DSL (still textual) where you can express a
state-machine in tabular form could be useful.
/Kenneth, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Ulf Wiger <> wrote:
> Hmm… since it has been presented in public, I guess I can also add that
> I've seen the Erlang code generated from that model, and it's not something
> that I would ever want to use in production. :)
> There was some discussion about whether the code could be 'trivially
> optimized', but I think it should be demonstrated first. The code pretty
> much looked like a naive mapping from an OO design onto Erlang.
> I was involved in quite some discussion about the point of doing this in
> the first place. The focus area for this approach is Hardware-Software
> co-design, and in that narrow niche, it really seems like a useful idea.
> However, it's a stretch to imagine that one would need to be open to
> generating target code as either e.g. VHDL or Erlang - at least from a
> target-agnostic high-level design.
> Another point of discussion was why an Erlang programmer would want to
> bother with Executable UML in the first place, as it doesn't offer more
> powerful abstractions than Erlang already has - just *different*
> abstractions, which is not necessarily a good thing.
> It got to the point where I was invited to meet one of the chief designers
> of BridgePoint, so that he could convince me. Interestingly, he turned out
> to be a secret fan of Functional Programming and Erlang, and we ended up
> agreeing that Executable UML and Erlang were at roughly the same
> abstraction level, and there was no benefit for the Erlang programmer to
> first architect the system using one paradigm, and then make a sideways
> move into another paradigm. He did try to argue that Erlang programmers
> might still find the Schlaer&Mellor analysis domains useful, but I thought
> that the mass of unwanted baggage would cancel out any such benefit.
> Having said this, I don't want to take away from the other work done
> behind this. It's impressive. I just don't think that throwing Erlang into
> the mix helps their case, nor that of the Erlang programmers. Also, this is
> of course my personal opinion - I freely admit that I have not tried it out
> for real.
> Ulf W
> On 14 Feb 2012, at 16:31, Olivier BOUDEVILLE wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> In echo to the older thread "UML or other modeling tools" (
> we happened to find an Ericsson presentation about ExecutableUML (
> which apparently was already able to generate Erlang code.
> This xtUML looks like a very interesting approach; in short we are
> contemplating to specify some domain-specific models that are involved in a
> discrete simulation, based on a proper high-level, formal,
> implementation-agnostic pivot format, targeting a few different simulation
> engines, one of which expecting models to be written in C++, another one
> expecting them in Erlang. So it looks like if our pivot format could be a
> flavour of xtUML (a special, constrained, case thereof).
> Is there any material (documentation and/or tool) that is publicly
> available, so that we could test this ExecutableUML-based approach? Any
> opinion in terms of completeness, applicability or maturity?
> Thanks in advance for any information!
> Best regards,
> Olivier Boudeville
> EDF R&D : 1, avenue du Général de Gaulle, 92140 Clamart, France
> Département SINETICS, groupe ASICS (I2A), bureau B-226
> Office : +33 1 47 65 59 58 / Mobile : +33 6 16 83 37 22 / Fax : +33 1 47
> 65 27 13
> Ce message et toutes les pièces jointes (ci-après le 'Message') sont
> établis à l'intention exclusive des destinataires et les informations qui y
> figurent sont strictement confidentielles. Toute utilisation de ce Message
> non conforme à sa destination, toute diffusion ou toute publication totale
> ou partielle, est interdite sauf autorisation expresse.
> Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce Message, il vous est interdit de
> le copier, de le faire suivre, de le divulguer ou d'en utiliser tout ou
> partie. Si vous avez reçu ce Message par erreur, merci de le supprimer de
> votre système, ainsi que toutes ses copies, et de n'en garder aucune trace
> sur quelque support que ce soit. Nous vous remercions également d'en
> avertir immédiatement l'expéditeur par retour du message.
> Il est impossible de garantir que les communications par messagerie
> électronique arrivent en temps utile, sont sécurisées ou dénuées de toute
> erreur ou virus.
> This message and any attachments (the 'Message') are intended solely for
> the addressees. The information contained in this Message is confidential.
> Any use of information contained in this Message not in accord with its
> purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is
> prohibited except formal approval.
> If you are not the addressee, you may not copy, forward, disclose or use
> any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please delete
> it and all copies from your system and notify the sender immediately by
> return message.
> E-mail communication cannot be guaranteed to be timely secure, error or
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions