I hate UML
That’s overstating the case, perhaps, but what I hate is the whole insane concept that UML is a “documentation format”. It’s not. It’s OK to use it to think about a problem, and to sketch out the architecture of the problem, but it is not a substitute for narrative and true documentation.
If someone hands me another UML model (complete with thousands of HTML pages documenting every class), and says that their software is “documented”, I’m going to smack them.
This entry was posted at 11:00 am on 15 July 2008 and is filed under Technology. You can follow any responses to this entry through the post-specific RSS 2.0 feed.
If I have to choose between narrative and UML, there’s no choice. UML is useful to think about a problem, and perhaps to express certain subsets of the problem domain, but it doesn’t capture things like intent, business need, rationale, etc. All of those are often much more important than what methods a class has. Interaction diagrams are a bit more useful, but I see them so rarely compared to the worthless class diagrams.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
> it is not a substitute for narrative and true documentation
So what does that ‘non-narrative true documentation’ look like in your opinion?
Best regards,
Yanic