UML 语义差异是否必要？
我问的是 UML 中的语义差异是否有必要或有用。当它更加正式并因此可验证甚至用于快速原型设计时，它不是更有用吗？方差有什么好处？你能举一些例子吗？
I am asking if it is necessary or useful to have semantic variances in UML. Would it not be more useful when it was more formal and therefore verifiable or even used for rapid prototyping. What is the benefit of the variance? Can you give some examples?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（1）
我宁愿去掉 UML 的语义变化点。当我对图进行建模时，导致混乱的一个典型例子是多分类语义变化点。在类图中对泛化进行建模时，您可以选择假设该图允许多重分类（一个对象可以是不通过子类型关系相关的两个或多个类的实例）。
通常具有编程背景的设计人员隐含地认为这是不可能的，而在概念层面上，我们许多人倾向于隐含地认为这是可能的。你可以想象结果。
I would prefer to get rid of the semantic variation points of the UML. A typical example that causes confusion when I model diagrams is the multiple classification semantic variation point. When modeling generalizations in a class diagram, you can choose to assume that the diagram admits multiple classification (an object can be instance of two or more classes not related by a subtype relationship) or not.
Usually designers with a background programming implicitly assume that this is not possible while at the conceptual level many of us tend to implicitly assume that this is possible. You can imagine the result.