Saturday 25 March 2006

UML 2.0

Introduction to OMG UML: "UML 2.0 - A Major Upgrade: The 'Available' version of the UML 2.0 Superstructure specification (that is, the version that has finished its first maintenance release and been built into vendor products) has been completed, and is available to everyone for free download." Three separate parts of UML 2.0 - the Infrastructure (that is, the meta-metamodel), Object Constraint Language, and Diagram Interchange - are still undergoing their first maintenance and will become Available Specifications when this completes. There's a description of the current state of all four specifications, and links to all of them, here.

What's new in UML 2.0: We've already integrated the new features into this writeup, but here's a summary:

  • Nested Classifiers: This is an extremely powerful concept. In UML, almost every model building block you work with (classes, objects, components, behaviors such as activities and state machines, and more) is a classifier. In UML 2.0, you can nest a set of classes inside the component that manages them, or embed a behavior (such as a state machine) inside the class or component that implements it. This capability also lets you build up complex behaviors from simpler ones, the capability that defines the Interaction Overview Diagram. You can layer different levels of abstraction in multiple ways: For example, you can build a model of your Enterprise, and zoom in to embedded site views, and then to departmental views within the site, and then to applications within a department. Alternatively, you can nest computational models within a business process model. OMG's Business Enterprise Integration Domain Task Force (BEI DTF) is currently working on several interesting new standards in business process and business rules.
  • Improved Behavioral Modeling: In UML 1.X, the different behavioral models were independent, but in UML 2.0, they all derive from a fundamental definition of a behavior (except for the Use Case, which is subtly different but still participates in the new organization).
  • Improved relationship between Structural and Behavioral Models: As we pointed out under Nested Classifiers, UML 2.0 lets you designate that a behavior represented by (for example) a State Machine or Sequence Diagram is the behavior of a class or a component.
  • ================================
  • Webcast: Moving to Eclipse the MDA Way: Tips and Tricks for Successful Software Development
    by Bastiaan Schönhage, OptimalJ Development Team Lead, Compuware
    bullet OMG has teamed with Unisys Corporation as its Testing Partner to deliver the UML/XMI Interoperability Testing Program

    ORCA introduces Regulatory Compliance Vendor Directory – submit your solution today!
  • http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1861000871/ref=ase_monstercom/102-0997366-5032961?n=283155&tagActionCode=monstercom

  • This misconception on my part may be the result of the content matter: UML is a formal syntax for modeling real-world systems in such a manner that facilitates writing object-oriented software. For me, this topic begot a "chicken or the egg" paradox. Knowing UML should help me to understand the benefits and mechanics of Object Oriented Programming (OOP), but without having a moderate OOP background I couldn't appreciate UML. I actually tried reading this book about a year ago, but gave up after reading the first three chapters. As an aside, there are only five chapters in this book, so that was a reasonable attempt!

    Since that time, I have improved my understanding of how to write OO software, and I have returned to this book. I enjoyed reading this book on my second attempt. Therefore my first admonition to the potential reader is that she have at the very least an introductory knowledge of OOP prior to reading this book. Having journeyman knowledge would serve her even better.

    The first chapter covers the genesis of UML. It is very short, and for the most part can be skipped. Suffice to say that several OOP gurus were developing their own syntaxes independently, and then did something truly remarkable: they set aside their egos, and decided to unify their efforts. Thus was UML born.

    The second chapter is a nice summary of OO features. The first time I read this book, I could grasp the meaning of concepts like inheritance, generalization, containment, and polymorphism, but they were just that: concepts. After having first-hand experience working with those concepts in a program, this chapter had much more significance for me. If you just read those last two sentences, and they described your comfort level with OOP, then you would likely appreciate this book.

    The third chapter presents the formal UML notation. It is very straightforward, and thankfully there are many examples. An interesting point to note is that UML is intentionally language non-specific. If you come from a C++, Smalltalk, Java, or even a VB background, you can make use of UML. The notation is meant to be independent from the constructs of the programming language used to implement its diagrams. "Instant UML" maintains its adherence to this principle by remaining wonderfully language-neutral.

  • ==> for experts only:] i liked this book a lot as it gives solid examples ..i have read few books on uml before i like this one the best and it is pretty much "instant" if you want to grab the past experience of software industry in two days :)

/. Dual-core: TwoSteeringWheelsPerCar? TurdWare for 98% consumers

Dual-core Systems Necessary for Business Users?: "1996 Called
(Score:5, Insightful)
by wideBlueSkies (618979) * Alter Relationship on Thursday March 23, @07:44PM (#14985047)
(Last Journal: Thursday March 23, @08:07PM)
It wants to know why we need pentiums on the desktop. Why isn't a 486 DX fast enough?

wbs.
--
Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer - Adolf Hitler
One world, One web, One program - Microsoft"
====================
The key quote here, IMO, is: "Multiple core systems are a boon for anyone who runs multiple processes simultaneously and/or have a lot of services, background processes and other apps running at once."

All the anti-virus, anti-spyware, anti-exploit, DRM, IM clients, mail clients, multimedia "helper" apps, browser "helper" apps, little system tray goodies, etc., etc., and so on, it can start to add up. A lot of home and small business users are running a lot more background and simultaneous stuff than they may realize.

That's not to say these noticeably slow down a 3.2GHz single-core machine with a gig of RAM, but the amount of stuff running in the backgrownd is growing exponentially. Dual core may not be of much benefit to business users now, but how long will that last?

- Greg

--
Ripped off at the ER - DoctorTricks.com [doctortricks.com]
==============

Now I can run my spyware ...

(Score:5, Funny)
by Hyram Graff (962405) Alter Relationship on Thursday March 23, @07:39PM (#14985031)
Multiple core systems are a boon for anyone who runs multiple processes simultaneously and/or have a lot of services, background processes and other apps running at once.

In other words, it sounds like it's perfect for all those people [screwed by M$ ebola-ware/js ] who wanted to get another processor to run their spyware on but couldn't afford the extra CPU before now.

=============

IPR isn't natural

(Score:5, Interesting)
by MarkusQ (450076) Alter Relationship on Friday March 24, @10:53AM (#14988681)
(Last Journal: Tuesday January 10, @03:50AM)

It's a trick question. "IPR" isn't natural, it's an invention (and a relatively recent one at that). So asking where its "natural boundaries" are is silly. Where is are the "natural boundaries" of Rap? Or of lavender? Where is the natural boundary between Spanish and Italian?

It's a silly question.

For the vast bulk of history (and for all time before that), there was no such thing as "Intellectual Property." There isn't even any analogy in the animal kingdom (just imagine Monarch butterflies issuing a take down notice to other butterflies that have infringed on their trademark look and feel). The "natural" state is for people to thinks, say, and do whatever they want, and to copy good ideas wherever they see them. That, in a nutshell, is how culture works. But very recently there has arisen the observation that some good ideas are hard to copy unless the inventor is willing to explain the trick to you. And one way to induce them to do so is to ameliorate their fear that by so doing they will create a host of competitors, by promising to prevent other people from using the trick for awhile provided that they share it.

Sounds like a fair deal, but, like many things, a little greed is all it takes to spoil it for everyone.

-- MarkusQ

--
Impeachment: It's not just for blow jobs [thenation.com]
=============
People argue that the creation of stuff like OpenOffice deprives the fine folks working on MS Office of their jobs. What's ignored is the fact that every company who once spent $300 a pop on Office licenses can now put that money toward projects that didn't exist before, or better yet (but more unlikely) pay it to their employees. And the guys at MS Office are now free to work on something that doesn't already exist.

Money is just a placeholder. The economy is actually about value, and OpenOffice adds what was previously considered hundreds of dollars of value to the computer of everyone who downloads it - at no actual charge.

When software can be distributed to the whol

Read the rest of this comment...

==================

[car parts --> not illegal to swap/analogy]
I realize that at some point the analogy breaks down because a car can't be put into a replicator like a DVD can. However, it seems to me that we are becoming less and less of an ownership society and more of a "borrow" society. I talked to someone the other day who works for a large firm, and they pay 160 grand a MONTH to license some software for their business. That does not include any changes they want made to the software - that costs extra.

I don't have a problem with profit. I have a problem with racketeering. I don't really know where this whole "you don't own it, you only licensed it from us and we

Read the rest of this comment...

=============== ][][][][][][][][][][][][][

(in no particular order)

Read the rest of this comment...

][][][][][][][][][][][][

Tools for *actual* sysadmins

(Score:5, Informative)
by algae (2196) Alter Relationship on Friday March 24, @11:44AM (#14989165)
The stuff posted in the article was alright, and given the guy is 17, I'll cut him some slack. However, as a professional sysadmin for the last 10 years, I think I can whip up a good list of my favorite tools.

Bash. If you don't know how to write a for-loop in bash to connect to all your hosts and make some changes, you don't know what you're missing.

SSH, with an agent and keys. If you get asked for the password every time you connect to a host with the above bash loop, you're missing on a very powerful tool. Passwords are a once-daily thing for me now, and that's only because my screen lock also kills my ssh agent.

Osiris. Because you should know what's happening on the computers you maintain. File integrity monitoring is a Good Thing. File integrity monitoring with a client/server architecture is a Very Good Thing.

Snort. Use snort. You have no idea what's happening on your network until you use snort. If you have desktop users, load up the bleeding-snort rulesets and be prepared to panic in horror as you see all the crapware flowing over your network.

Perl. With bash-fu. Like this: $ perl -i.BAK -pe 's/(http://192/ [192]\.168\.0)\.2/$1.3/' `find . -iname "*.htm"` You'll never look at sed again
;)

Finally, if you've got a boss who will let you, rip out those expensive proprietary firewalls and replace them with OpenBSD on a Soekris solid-state computer. OpenBSD pf is
Read the rest of this comment...
============================

Mine

(Score:4, Informative)
by C_Kode (102755) Alter Relationship on Friday March 24, @01:26PM (#14989980)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Wednesday October 05, @01:46PM)
1) strace (Program stalling or not working with ambiguous error messages?)
2) nmap
3) sysstat utilities (sar, iostat, vmstat, etc)
4) python (my automation tool of choice)
5) grep/awk/sed (filtering output etc)
6) Nagios
7) DenyHost (log watcher that blocks hosts via deny.hosts file)
8) snort
9) screen
10) lsof (list open file discriptors (sockets, streams, and actual files))

As for those who keep saying "ImageMagick? What kind admin uses ImageMagick!" Well, I used to work for a e-commerice bookseller. We delt with millions of bookcover images and ImageMagick was a golden for mass manipulation of images. As for MP3 tools, I like my music why I work! Whats wrong with that? It's not essential for the job, but it is for my happiness.
--
Danger: Info Inflow Overload, Knowledge Blackhole Imminent!
=======================

In no particular order:

(Score:5, Interesting)
by commonchaos (309500) Alter Relationship on Friday March 24, @11:44AM (#14989164)
(Last Journal: Monday April 04, @02:12PM)
  • emacs
  • grep
  • perl
  • sed
  • svn
  • xml [sourceforge.net] (manipulate XML from the command line)
  • tar
  • ssh (this one is fun: "ssh server tar -cf - directory | tar -xv")
  • for (built-in bash command, one-line scripts from the command line are very useful)
  • lsof (what processes have open network ports? why can't I unmount that disk?)
  • wget
  • ping
  • telnet (test SMTP, HTTP, etc servers by hand)
  • nmap
See also: Commonly used commands [kegel.com]

////////////////////////==========================

Sigh...

(Score:5, Insightful)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 24, @11:47AM (#14989186)
I work for a very large MSSP, and this makes me quite sad.

Sad, because Snort's source code is not exactly a mystery. And Check Point's technology already does a much better job at preventing intrusions, since it is a firewall and Snort is a really shitty IPS. (All IPS are shitty, sorry. I like Snort for IDS, really) My sadness here is deep and mournful.

I'm also really disappointed, because I hate Sourcefire. I was really looking forward to Check Point reigning in their way-out-of-line sales guys. More than that, tech support at Sourcefire (all 3 guys!) sucks, 'cause they're all arrogant pricks who don't really give a shit about the customer, and honestly believe their code is perfect and never has problems. Actually, that sums up SF pretty well. Check Point, for all their problems, actually listens when we complain, which is nice, though getting things fixed is an ungodly slow process.
===============

Re:irrational fear?

(Score:5, Insightful)
by algae (2196) Alter Relationship on Friday March 24, @12:12PM (#14989377)
Maybe you're missing the possibility that whoever's using Snort in the DoD doesn't want to have to hire a full-time programmer to act as tech support when they can just get a contract with Sourcefire instead? As far as I can tell, this isn't about code, it's about support. Sensitive information occasionally needs to be given to tech support in order to diagnose/fix problems, and the DoD would prefer whoever's on the recieving end to be an American. I wonder if Sourcefire have any support personnel with gov't security clearances.
--
"It is shocking to have your life work reduced to a tenth of a square inch of silicon." --J. Presper Eckert, ENIAC co-inv.
{{{{{{{{{}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}===================
  • Re:Good Motto

    (Score:5, Interesting)
    by dildo (250211) Alter Relationship on Friday March 24, @02:19PM (#14990394)
    It is possible to build comptuers that are optimized for certain kinds of calculations.

    For example, Gerald Sussman of MIT (a computer scientist) and a Jack Wisdom (a physicist) decided they wanted to do long-term modelling of the solar system's evolution over time. Long time modelling of a multi-body system requires a fantastic amount of calculation. What is the best way to do it?

    Sussman and Wisdom came up with a crafty idea: build a computer that is specially configured at the hardware level to do the modelling. Sussman and his colleagues decided that with off-the-shelf parts they could build a computer that would be just as or more capable of modeling this system than a supercomputer would be. The result was the Digital Orrery, a relativlely cheap computer that gave great results. (It is now featured in the Smithsonian museum.)

    Think of it: if your computer is going to be doing the Fast Fourier Transform 6.02x10^23 times per day, why not build a superfast chip that does nothing but the FFT rather than express it as software? It's a pretty cool idea. I think this is the sort of thing that Cray computers claims to want to do with its motto.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • 7 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • ==========
=================###################========

Re:Push Back

(Score:5, Informative)
by DaveJay (133437) Alter Relationship on Friday March 24, @05:19PM (#14991610)
Here are some handy things to phrase more politely than I'm phrasing them here:

"I can't tell you when it will be finished until we know exactly what we're building. Help us nail down the specifications, and I'll be able to give you a finish date with the current staff and workload."

"There is a finite amount of manpower available to do this work, and the schedule I gave you is firm, unless we either add people -- and that won't be a one-to-one improvement, it will depend on how much work can be run in parallel -- or reduce scope. Help us do that, and I'll be able to get you a new completion date."

"I know you want these changes in the initial launch, and I want to give you these changes in the initial launch. However, there will be some impact to how long it will take, because a lot of work we've already completed will need to be redone. Help us nail down the new specifications, and I'll be able to give you a finish date with the current staff and workload."

Repeat ad nauseum until the project is finished.
--

---
"You can't reason someone out of something that he didn't reason himself into." (swift?)
===============================
94% of Repubs and 21% of Dems voted to renew the Patriot Act [house.gov]

=======================what is an "internet" department? ======

Re:WTF

(Score:5, Funny)
by Frostalicious (657235) Alter Relationship on Friday March 24, @04:43PM (#14991405)
(Last Journal: Monday March 31, @01:01PM)
He manages the whole internet with only two guys. And management still complains. What hardasses.
===================
[more data @bottom?] repeat:
(in no particular order)