Re^2: Model the data first

I've worked a bit with UML 4 to 5 years ago, and quite frankly, it confuses me more than it helps : I find too often that the nice UML blue-print doesn't fit well actual data, or workflow, and has to be trashed after the development has already advanced quite far. Maybe that's just me...
Proper datamodeling is very important though, but I prefer thinking it directly in Perl, or relational databases, or whatever else I'll be using to manage the actual data.

Comment on Re^2: Model the data first

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Model the data first by mugwumpjism (Hermit) on Jun 08, 2005 at 22:28 UTC
No matter what the application, there is always a model that expresses the Classes in your code, and a metamodel that expresses the structure you used to write them. The first thing you do when you refactor someone else's mess is identify what objects they have, what properties they are setting etc. The thing is, is your model explicit in your design or implicitly spread throughout your codebase? $h=$ENV{HOME};my@q=split/\n\n/,`cat $h/.quotes`;$s="$h/." ."signature";$t=`cat $s`;print$t,"\n",$q[rand($#q)],"\n"; [download]	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: Model the data first by wazoox (Prior) on Jun 09, 2005 at 10:26 UTC
I'm trying hard to have an explicit model, I promise :) However it's not always as easy as it may seem at the first glance. More than that, UML drives me in path to models that may be elegant or clever, but hardly map on actual perl code :)	[reply]