Appendix F Use Case Diagrams

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Appendix F Use Case Diagrams Visualizing Legacy Systems with UML Abstract Understanding a system is of critical importance to a developer. A developer must be able to understand the business processes being modelled by the system along with the system’s functionality, structure, events, and interactions with external entities. This understanding is of even more importance in reverse engineering. Although developers have the advantage of having the source code available, system documentation is often missing or incomplete and the original users, whose requirements were used to design the system, are often long gone. 0. Introduction A developer requires a model of the system not only in order to understand the business processes being modelled but the structure and dynamics of a system. Visualization of this system model is often necessary in order to clearly depict the complex relationships among model elements of that system. This chapter explains why visualization of a system, through a series of UML diagrams, is necessary and explains why relying on source code as the sole form of system documentation is often inadequate. A detailed outline of the process of deriving information from an analysis of legacy system is given, along with the rules to convert this information to a UML model of this system. This chapter also investigates whether it is possible to visualize a system and which of the nine possible UML diagrams are needed to represent this visualization. A brief overview of the methods, along with their inherent difficulty, that are used to extract UML diagrams from a legacy system is provided. Finally, a tool, TAGDUR, is introduced which has automated some of these analysis processes and which models some aspects of this system in UML. 0.1. Why Not Rely on Source Code for System Documentation? Relying on source code solely to obtain an understanding of the system has many disadvantages, particularly in legacy systems. In many legacy systems, the original design of the system has been obfuscated by the many incremental changes during the system’s long maintenance history. Furthermore, the end-users, whose requirements originally help design the system to meet their business needs, have usually long gone and the documentation outlining these requirements are often missing. Without these original end-users and no documentation, it is often difficult to determine the exact business processes that these systems model. Source code is very programming-language-dependent (Yang, 1999). In order to understand the code, the developer must be fully proficient in the programming language used to develop the system. The function and role of each section of source code within the system may be obvious to a developer but may be meaningless to a non-technical end-user. End-users want to see how the business processes that the system represents are modelled and they want to ensure that all of their business requirements are met in the system. End-users are not concerned with the internal design and details of this system. It is difficult for developers to view parallel data and control flows from reading the code. The control logic, especially if this control logic is heavily nested, is difficult to visualize from the source code, particularly to quickly identify which control constructs affect which parts of code. It is difficult to visualize events occurring in various parts of code and to visualize how these events interact with various objects in the system. Relying on source code as the only documentation source makes it difficult to view the interaction of system objects with other objects and external actors. Source code encompasses many perspectives (such as objects, deployment of components, and timing of object interactions) within itself. These multiple perspectives are confusing – it is difficult to represent the source code in each separate perspective. Source code has the additional disadvantage in that it is difficult to represent abstract concepts and behaviour from low-level, detailed source code. 0.2. UML One method to overcome this problem of requiring multiple perspectives of the same system is to visualize the system using some sort of graphical notation. Each perspective is given its own diagram type which is specialized to best represent this perspective. One of the most common graphical notations is UML (Unified Modelling Language). UML provides multiple perspectives of the system. Use case diagrams model the business processes embodied in the system from a user’s perspective. Statecharts and class diagrams model the behaviour and structure of the system respectively; the behaviour and structure of the system would be of most interest to developers. 0.3. Why Visualization of the System is Necessary for Reverse Engineering? Program understanding can be defined as the process of developing an accurate mental model of a software system’s intended architecture, purpose, and behaviour. This model is developed through the use of pattern matching, visualisation, and knowledge-based techniques. The field of program understanding involves fundamental issues of code representation, structural system representation, data and control flow, quality and complexity metrics, localisation of algorithms and plans, identification of abstract data types and generic operations, and multiple view system analysis using visualisation and analysis tools. Reverse engineering involves analysing data bindings, common reference analysis, similarity analysis, and subsystem and redundancy analysis (Whitney,1995). Program understanding involves the use of tools that perform complex reasoning about how behaviours and properties arise from particular combinations of language primitives within the program. One method of program understanding is to use visitors, or small reusable classes, whose function is to parse the source system and evaluate the combinations of language primitives that had been discovered during parsing (Wills,1993). Other methods try to evaluate and understand a system by taking, as input, the goals and purpose of the system as a specification (Johnson, 1986). Another method is to use clichés which try to recognise commonly used data structures and algorithms and then match these structures and algorithms to higher level abstractions. Examples of clichés are the structures and algorithms associated with hash tables and priority queues. The degree of accuracy of the matching varies with goal of program understanding. An example, an exact match is needed for program verification while only a reasonably close match is needed for documentation purposes. Software visualisation is a technique to enable humans to use their brain to make analogies and to link a visual software representation with the ideas that this representation portrays. This link would be much more difficult to make if the software representations were purely in textual form. Software visualisation relies on crafts such as animation, graphic design, and cinematography (Price,1992). Software visualisation has been used for decades in order to help developers understand programs. These techniques vary from flowcharts [Goldstein] to animated graphical representations of data structures (Baecker, 1981). However, many of these software visualisation systems are limited to displaying one type of data or level of abstraction. Few visualisation systems have the ability to suppress lower-level detail in order to depict higher-level concepts of the system. Program visualisation systems or tools can be characterised according to their scope, content, form, method, interaction, and effectiveness. Scope refers to the visualisation system’s general characteristics such as whether it models concurrent programs or whether there are any size limitations as to the system being depicted. Content refers to the content being visualised. Some visualisation systems can model both data and code while others model algorithms only. Form refers to what elements are being used in the visualisation. Some visualisation systems use animated graphics while other systems provide multiple views of different parts of the system. Method refers to how the tool specifies the visualisation. Does the tool require the program source code to be modified in order for it to be visualised? Some tools require the user to insert special statements in code of special interest in order for this code to be properly visualised. Interaction refers to how the user interacts and controls the visualisation. How does the user navigate through the visualisation of a large system in order to see how different parts of the system are being modelled? Effectiveness refers to how well the visualisation communicates information regarding the system being visualised (Price,1992). Using this taxonomy outlined by Price, a number of program visualisation systems can be objectively evaluated. The film, Sorting Out Sorting, is an animated visualisation tool to explain algorithms. Balsa, another visualisation tool, generates animations of Pascal programs. LogoMotion allows users to indicate what aspects of a Logo program they wish to have visualised. Chifosky and Cross define reverse engineering to be “the process of analyzing a subject system to identify the system’s components and their interrelationships and create representations of the system in another form or at a higher level of abstraction”. Chifosky and Cross state six goals of reverse engineering: z controlling complexity z generating alternative views z recovering lost information z detecting
Recommended publications
  • Activity Diagram Inheritance1
    Activity Diagram Inheritance1 Arnd Schnieders, Frank Puhlmann Hasso-Plattner-Institute for IT Systems Engineering at the University of Potsdam {schnieders, puhlmann}@hpi.uni-potsdam.de Abstract This paper outlines the ongoing work on the realization of a flexible inheritance mechanism for Activity Diagrams that assures the maintenance of syntactical correctness for the derived Activity Diagrams. The objective is to support the reuse of process models especially by applying Activity Diagram inheritance as a variability mechanism in the context of product line oriented software development. Keywords: Activity Diagrams, domain engineering, process inheritance, variability mechanism 1. Introduction In industry similar products are frequently developed and produced as product lines. One of the main advantages is a gain of efficiency in development and production since parts, which are common for several product line members, can be reused optimally. This approach has been transferred successfully to software development and is also known by the name domain engineering. Variability mechanisms are thereby important for the effectiveness of domain engineering. A great number of variability mechanisms has already been published [5, 9, 11, 13, 18]. Unfortunately, existing variability mechanisms only refer to the static aspects of a software system’s design while the impact of variability mechanisms on the process view on the system has been strongly neglected. Therefore, the first contribution of this paper is to contribute to closing this gap by making the important variability mechanism inheritance available for process design models in order to derive process model variants. The second contribution of this paper is to show how the defined process inheritance mechanism is realized concretely for UML 2.0 Activity Diagrams.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture for Chapter 2, Modeling With
    09/10/2019 Overview: modeling with UML Modeling with UML What is modeling? What is UML? Use case diagrams Class diagrams Oriented Software Engineering - Object What is modeling? Example: street map Modeling consists of building an abstraction of reality. Abstractions are simplifications because: They ignore irrelevant details and They only represent the relevant details. What is relevant or irrelevant depends on the purpose of the model. Why model software? Systems, Models and Views Why model software? A model is an abstraction describing a subset of a system A view depicts selected aspects of a model Software is getting increasingly more complex A notation is a set of graphical or textual rules for depicting views Windows XP > 40 million lines of code Views and models of a single system may overlap each other A single programmer cannot manage this amount of code in its entirety. Code is not easily understandable by developers who did not Examples: write it System: Aircraft We need simpler representations for complex systems Models: Flight simulator, scale model Modeling is a mean for dealing with complexity Views: All blueprints, electrical wiring, fuel system 1 09/10/2019 Systems, Models and Views Models, Views and Systems (UML) Flightsimulator Blueprints * * System Model View Aircraft Described by Depicted by Model 2 View 2 View 1 System Airplane: System View 3 Model 1 Scale Model: Model Flight Simulator: Model Electrical Wiring Scale Model Blueprints: View Fuel System: View Electrical Wiring: View What is UML? What is UML? UML (Unified Modeling Language) The Unified Modeling Language (UML) is a language for Specifying An emerging standard for modeling object-oriented software.
    [Show full text]
  • Xtuml: Current and Next State of a Modeling Dialect
    xtUML: Current and Next State of a Modeling Dialect Cortland Starrett [email protected] 2 Outline • Introduc)on • Background • Brief History • Key Players • Current State • Related Modeling Dialects • Next State • Conclusion [email protected] 3 Introduc)on [email protected] 4 Background • Shlaer-Mellor Method (xtUML) – subject maers, separaon of concerns – data, control, processing – BridgePoint • data modeling (Object Oriented Analysis (OOA)) • state machines • ac)on language • interpre)ve execu)on • model compilaon [email protected] 5 History • 1988, 1991 Shlaer-Mellor Method published by Stephen Mellor and Sally Shlaer. • 2002 Executable UML established as Shlaer-Mellor OOA using UML notation. • 2004 Commercial Corporate Proprietary Licensed. • 2013 BridgePoint xtUML Editor goes open source under Apache 2.0. • 2014 all of BridgePoint (including Verifier and model compilers) goes open source under Apache and Creative Commons. • 2015 Papyrus Industry Consortium and xtUML/BridgePoint contribution • 2015 OSS of alternate generator engine (community building) • 2016 Papyrus-xtUML (BridgePoint) Eclipse Foundation governance • 2016 OSS contributions from industry, university and individuals [email protected] 6 Key Players • Saab • UK Crown • Agilent • Ericsson • Fuji-Xerox • Academia [email protected] 7 Current State • body of IP • self-hosng • Papyrus (and Papyrus Industry Consor)um) [email protected] 8 Related Dialects • MASL • Alf • UML-RT [email protected]
    [Show full text]
  • The Guide to Succeeding with Use Cases
    USE-CASE 2.0 The Guide to Succeeding with Use Cases Ivar Jacobson Ian Spence Kurt Bittner December 2011 USE-CASE 2.0 The Definitive Guide About this Guide 3 How to read this Guide 3 What is Use-Case 2.0? 4 First Principles 5 Principle 1: Keep it simple by telling stories 5 Principle 2: Understand the big picture 5 Principle 3: Focus on value 7 Principle 4: Build the system in slices 8 Principle 5: Deliver the system in increments 10 Principle 6: Adapt to meet the team’s needs 11 Use-Case 2.0 Content 13 Things to Work With 13 Work Products 18 Things to do 23 Using Use-Case 2.0 30 Use-Case 2.0: Applicable for all types of system 30 Use-Case 2.0: Handling all types of requirement 31 Use-Case 2.0: Applicable for all development approaches 31 Use-Case 2.0: Scaling to meet your needs – scaling in, scaling out and scaling up 39 Conclusion 40 Appendix 1: Work Products 41 Supporting Information 42 Test Case 44 Use-Case Model 46 Use-Case Narrative 47 Use-Case Realization 49 Glossary of Terms 51 Acknowledgements 52 General 52 People 52 Bibliography 53 About the Authors 54 USE-CASE 2.0 The Definitive Guide Page 2 © 2005-2011 IvAr JacobSon InternationAl SA. All rights reserved. About this Guide This guide describes how to apply use cases in an agile and scalable fashion. It builds on the current state of the art to present an evolution of the use-case technique that we call Use-Case 2.0.
    [Show full text]
  • OMG Systems Modeling Language (OMG Sysml™) Tutorial 25 June 2007
    OMG Systems Modeling Language (OMG SysML™) Tutorial 25 June 2007 Sanford Friedenthal Alan Moore Rick Steiner (emails included in references at end) Copyright © 2006, 2007 by Object Management Group. Published and used by INCOSE and affiliated societies with permission. Status • Specification status – Adopted by OMG in May ’06 – Finalization Task Force Report in March ’07 – Available Specification v1.0 expected June ‘07 – Revision task force chartered for SysML v1.1 in March ‘07 • This tutorial is based on the OMG SysML adopted specification (ad-06-03-01) and changes proposed by the Finalization Task Force (ptc/07-03-03) • This tutorial, the specifications, papers, and vendor info can be found on the OMG SysML Website at http://www.omgsysml.org/ 7/26/2007 Copyright © 2006,2007 by Object Management Group. 2 Objectives & Intended Audience At the end of this tutorial, you should have an awareness of: • Benefits of model driven approaches for systems engineering • SysML diagrams and language concepts • How to apply SysML as part of a model based SE process • Basic considerations for transitioning to SysML This course is not intended to make you a systems modeler! You must use the language. Intended Audience: • Practicing Systems Engineers interested in system modeling • Software Engineers who want to better understand how to integrate software and system models • Familiarity with UML is not required, but it helps 7/26/2007 Copyright © 2006,2007 by Object Management Group. 3 Topics • Motivation & Background • Diagram Overview and Language Concepts • SysML Modeling as Part of SE Process – Structured Analysis – Distiller Example – OOSEM – Enhanced Security System Example • SysML in a Standards Framework • Transitioning to SysML • Summary 7/26/2007 Copyright © 2006,2007 by Object Management Group.
    [Show full text]
  • VI. the Unified Modeling Language UML Diagrams
    Conceptual Modeling CSC2507 VI. The Unified Modeling Language Use Case Diagrams Class Diagrams Attributes, Operations and ConstraintsConstraints Generalization and Aggregation Sequence and Collaboration Diagrams State and Activity Diagrams 2004 John Mylopoulos UML -- 1 Conceptual Modeling CSC2507 UML Diagrams I UML was conceived as a language for modeling software. Since this includes requirements, UML supports world modeling (...at least to some extend). I UML offers a variety of diagrammatic notations for modeling static and dynamic aspects of an application. I The list of notations includes use case diagrams, class diagrams, interaction diagrams -- describe sequences of events, package diagrams, activity diagrams, state diagrams, …more... 2004 John Mylopoulos UML -- 2 Conceptual Modeling CSC2507 Use Case Diagrams I A use case [Jacobson92] represents “typical use scenaria” for an object being modeled. I Modeling objects in terms of use cases is consistent with Cognitive Science theories which claim that every object has obvious suggestive uses (or affordances) because of its shape or other properties. For example, Glass is for looking through (...or breaking) Cardboard is for writing on... Radio buttons are for pushing or turning… Icons are for clicking… Door handles are for pulling, bars are for pushing… I Use cases offer a notation for building a coarse-grain, first sketch model of an object, or a process. 2004 John Mylopoulos UML -- 3 Conceptual Modeling CSC2507 Use Cases for a Meeting Scheduling System Initiator Participant
    [Show full text]
  • How to Build a UML Model Announcements Rational Unified
    Announcements How to build a UML model ❚ HW3 – Phase 1 due on Feb 6th, 5:00pm (need to create new pairs, accounts) ❚ Feedback on M2: turn procedural code RUP into OO code, Planning game (show tables Steriotypes, packages, and with features, subtasks, estimates, object diagrams actuals, pair-programming partners) Case study ❚ Register for the Feb 18 Industry Reception 1 CS361 7-2 Rational Unified Process How RUP builds a model ❚ Designed to work with UML ❚ Gather use cases from customer ❚ No longer being promoted by IBM ❚ Make initial object model ❚ Roles - (out of 20 or so) ❚ For each use case: ❙ Architect ❙ step through use case, ❙ UI designer ❙ note the objects it requires ❙ Use case specifier ❙ note the operations it uses ❙ Use case engineer ❙ Component engineer ❚ Clean up the model CS361 7-3 CS361 7-4 Architect UI design ❚ Determine which use cases need to be ❚ Logical design developed first. ❙ Which user-interface elements are needed for ❚ High priority use cases each use case? ❙ describe important and critical functionality ❙ What information does the actor need to receive from or give to the system? ❘ security ❘ database ❚ Prototyping ❙ hard to retrofit later ❙ Often is on paper. ❙ Test on real users CS361 7-5 CS361 7-6 1 Requirements Specification Analysis model ❚ Not all requirements go in a use case. ❚ Class diagrams ❙ Example: security ❙ vague interfaces (“responsibilities”) ❙ Example: global performance ❙ vague associations (ignore navigability) ❚ Requirements document describes all ❙ stereotype classes: other requirements
    [Show full text]
  • Plantuml Language Reference Guide (Version 1.2021.2)
    Drawing UML with PlantUML PlantUML Language Reference Guide (Version 1.2021.2) PlantUML is a component that allows to quickly write : • Sequence diagram • Usecase diagram • Class diagram • Object diagram • Activity diagram • Component diagram • Deployment diagram • State diagram • Timing diagram The following non-UML diagrams are also supported: • JSON Data • YAML Data • Network diagram (nwdiag) • Wireframe graphical interface • Archimate diagram • Specification and Description Language (SDL) • Ditaa diagram • Gantt diagram • MindMap diagram • Work Breakdown Structure diagram • Mathematic with AsciiMath or JLaTeXMath notation • Entity Relationship diagram Diagrams are defined using a simple and intuitive language. 1 SEQUENCE DIAGRAM 1 Sequence Diagram 1.1 Basic examples The sequence -> is used to draw a message between two participants. Participants do not have to be explicitly declared. To have a dotted arrow, you use --> It is also possible to use <- and <--. That does not change the drawing, but may improve readability. Note that this is only true for sequence diagrams, rules are different for the other diagrams. @startuml Alice -> Bob: Authentication Request Bob --> Alice: Authentication Response Alice -> Bob: Another authentication Request Alice <-- Bob: Another authentication Response @enduml 1.2 Declaring participant If the keyword participant is used to declare a participant, more control on that participant is possible. The order of declaration will be the (default) order of display. Using these other keywords to declare participants
    [Show full text]
  • APECS: Polychrony Based End-To-End Embedded System Design and Code Synthesis
    APECS: Polychrony based End-to-End Embedded System Design and Code Synthesis Matthew E. Anderson Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Engineering Sandeep K. Shukla, Chair Lamine Mili Alireza Haghighat Chao Wang Yi Deng April 3, 2015 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: AADL, CPS, Model-based code synthesis, correct-by-construction code synthesis, Polychrony, code generators, OSATE, Ocarina Copyright 2015, Matthew E. Anderson APECS: Polychrony based End-to-End Embedded System Design and Code Synthesis Matthew E. Anderson (ABSTRACT) The development of high integrity embedded systems remains an arduous and error-prone task, despite the efforts by researchers in inventing tools and techniques for design automa- tion. Much of the problem arises from the fact that the semantics of the modeling languages for the various tools, are often distinct, and the semantics gaps are often filled manually through the engineer's understanding of one model or an abstraction. This provides an op- portunity for bugs to creep in, other than standardising software engineering errors germane to such complex system engineering. Since embedded systems applications such as avionics, automotive, or industrial automation are safety critical, it is very important to invent tools, and methodologies for safe and reliable system design. Much of the tools, and techniques deal with either the design of embedded platforms (hardware, networking, firmware etc), and software stack separately. The problem of the semantic gap between these two, as well as between models of computation used to capture semantics must be solved in order to design safer embedded systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Sysml Distilled: a Brief Guide to the Systems Modeling Language
    ptg11539604 Praise for SysML Distilled “In keeping with the outstanding tradition of Addison-Wesley’s techni- cal publications, Lenny Delligatti’s SysML Distilled does not disappoint. Lenny has done a masterful job of capturing the spirit of OMG SysML as a practical, standards-based modeling language to help systems engi- neers address growing system complexity. This book is loaded with matter-of-fact insights, starting with basic MBSE concepts to distin- guishing the subtle differences between use cases and scenarios to illu- mination on namespaces and SysML packages, and even speaks to some of the more esoteric SysML semantics such as token flows.” — Jeff Estefan, Principal Engineer, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory “The power of a modeling language, such as SysML, is that it facilitates communication not only within systems engineering but across disci- plines and across the development life cycle. Many languages have the ptg11539604 potential to increase communication, but without an effective guide, they can fall short of that objective. In SysML Distilled, Lenny Delligatti combines just the right amount of technology with a common-sense approach to utilizing SysML toward achieving that communication. Having worked in systems and software engineering across many do- mains for the last 30 years, and having taught computer languages, UML, and SysML to many organizations and within the college setting, I find Lenny’s book an invaluable resource. He presents the concepts clearly and provides useful and pragmatic examples to get you off the ground quickly and enables you to be an effective modeler.” — Thomas W. Fargnoli, Lead Member of the Engineering Staff, Lockheed Martin “This book provides an excellent introduction to SysML.
    [Show full text]
  • Systems Engineering with Sysml/UML Morgan Kaufmann OMG Press
    Systems Engineering with SysML/UML Morgan Kaufmann OMG Press Morgan Kaufmann Publishers and the Object Management Group™ (OMG) have joined forces to publish a line of books addressing business and technical topics related to OMG’s large suite of software standards. OMG is an international, open membership, not-for-profi t computer industry consortium that was founded in 1989. The OMG creates standards for software used in government and corporate environments to enable interoperability and to forge common development environments that encourage the adoption and evolution of new technology. OMG members and its board of directors consist of representatives from a majority of the organizations that shape enterprise and Internet computing today. OMG’s modeling standards, including the Unifi ed Modeling Language™ (UML®) and Model Driven Architecture® (MDA), enable powerful visual design, execution and maintenance of software, and other processes—for example, IT Systems Modeling and Business Process Management. The middleware standards and profi les of the Object Management Group are based on the Common Object Request Broker Architecture® (CORBA) and support a wide variety of industries. More information about OMG can be found at http://www.omg.org/. Related Morgan Kaufmann OMG Press Titles UML 2 Certifi cation Guide: Fundamental and Intermediate Exams Tim Weilkiens and Bernd Oestereich Real-Life MDA: Solving Business Problems with Model Driven Architecture Michael Guttman and John Parodi Architecture Driven Modernization: A Series of Industry Case Studies Bill Ulrich Systems Engineering with SysML/UML Modeling, Analysis, Design Tim Weilkiens Acquisitions Editor: Tiffany Gasbarrini Publisher: Denise E. M. Penrose Publishing Services Manager: George Morrison Project Manager: Mónica González de Mendoza Assistant Editor: Matt Cater Production Assistant: Lianne Hong Cover Design: Dennis Schaefer Cover Image: © Masterfile (Royalty-Free Division) Morgan Kaufmann Publishers is an imprint of Eslsevier.
    [Show full text]
  • A Dynamic Analysis Tool for Textually Modeled State Machines Using Umple
    UmpleRun: a Dynamic Analysis Tool for Textually Modeled State Machines using Umple Hamoud Aljamaan, Timothy Lethbridge, Miguel Garzón, Andrew Forward School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science University of Ottawa Ottawa, Canada [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Lethbridge.book Page 299 Tuesday, November 16, 2004 12:22 PM Abstract— In this paper, we present a tool named UmpleRun 4 demonstrates the tool usage. Subsequent sections walk that allows modelers to run the textually specified state machines through an example of instrumenting our example system and under analysis with an execution scenario to validate the model's performing dynamic analysis. dynamic behavior. In addition, trace specification will output Section 8.2 State diagrams 299 execution traces that contain model construct links. This will permit analysis of behavior at the model level. II. EXAMPLE CAR TRANSMISSION MODEL TO BE EXECUTED In this section, we will present the car transmission model Keywords— UmpleRun; Umple; UML; MOTL; stateNested machine; substates that and will guard be conditions our motivating example through this paper. It will execution trace; analysis Aalso state be diagram used to can explain be nested Umple inside and a state.MOTL The syntax. states of The the innerCar diagram are calledtransmission substates model. was inspired by a similar model in I. INTRODUCTION LethbridgeFigure 8.18 and shows Lagani a stateère’s diagram book [4] of. anThe automatic model consists transmission; of at the top one class with car transmission behavior captured by the state Umple [1,2] is a model-oriented programming language level this has three states: ‘Neutral’, ‘Reverse’ and a driving state, which is not machine shown in Fig.
    [Show full text]