• No results found

Chapter 2.1

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Chapter 2.1"

Copied!
25
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Chapter 2.1

Iterative, Evolutionary, and Agile

(2)

Introduction

• We will look at Agile Modeling, UML, and iterative and evolutionary development.

• We will also look at the RUP (Unified Process) as a popular iterative method.

• Be certain to review section 1.6 on UML Modeling and know how UML is used conceptually in modeling the problem

domain (Conceptual; analysis) as opposed to the solutions domain (Specification; design UML) and Implementation.

There are examples.

(3)

Compare Domain Model Entity with Design class Diagram

Conceptual Perspective (domain model) Raw UML class diagram notation used to visualize real-world concepts.

Specification or Implementation

Perspective

(design class diagram) Raw UML class diagram notation used to visualize software elements.

2

Die faceValue : int

getFaceValue() : int roll()

DiceGame die1 : Die

die2 : Die play()

DiceGame Die

faceValue Includes 2

1

(4)

An Example Design Class Diagram

Captures 1

Sale Date

isComplete : Boolean time

addLineItem(…)

Register

1

makeLineItem()

Three section box Navigability

methods; parameters not specified Type information

Still high level. Not much detail. Only names a couple of methods

No parameters, return types – these come later after iterating a bit.

(5)

Procedure in Creating Design Class Diagrams

Identify all the classes participating in the software solution from Domain Model.

Remember, all entities in domain model may not be candidate classes in design model for a given application.

Domain Entities shown below.

Create Design Model by analyzing use cases and interaction diagrams. (coming later) Look at the nouns as possible classes.

Draw Design classes in a class diagram.

Duplicate attributes from the associated concepts in the Domain Model.

(This is called a disconnected model. No relationships shown, Domain model entities shown)

Register

Store

ProductCatalog

SalesLineItem quantity Sale

Payment

address name

date

isComplete time

amount quantity

ProductSpecification description price

itemID

(6)

Next in Design Class Diagram

Add method names by analyzing the use cases and interaction diagrams. (coming) – The methods for each class can be identified by analyzing the interaction diagrams.

– Look at the verbs in the use cases – Dog-eared figure is a UML Note.

Sale date

isComplete time

:Register makeLineItem(spec, quantity) :Sale makeLineItem() If the message makeLineItem is

sent to an instance of class Sale, then class Sale must

define a makeLineItem method.

(7)

Continuing…

Add type information to the attributes and methods.

– See integer, String, boolean, and more….

Register

Store

ProductCatalog ProductSpecification

SalesLineItem Quantity: Integer Sale

Payment

Address: String Name: String

date

isComplete: Boolean time

amount

… description

price itemID endSale()

addLineItem() makeNewSale() makePayment()

getSpecification()

becomeComplete() makeLineItem() makePayment() getTotal()

getSubtotal()

addSale()

(8)

Associations, Navigability, and Dependency Relationships

Add the associations necessary to support the required attribute visibility.

– Can have roles at the end of an association.

Navigability is a property of the role implying visibility of the source to target class.

– Attribute visibility is implied.

– Add navigability arrows to the associations to indicate the direction of attribute visibility where applicable.

– Common situations suggesting a need to define an association with navigability from A to B:

• A sends a message to B.

• A creates an instance of B.

• A needs to maintain a connection to B

• Add dependency relationship lines to indicate non-attribute visibility.

(9)

Continuing: Adding Notes

Captures 1

Sale Date

isComplete : Boolean endSale() time

addLineItem() makePayment()

Register

1

makeLineItem() Register class will probably

have an attribute pointing to a Sale object.

Navigability arrow indicates Register objects are connected uni-directionally to Sale objects.

Absence of navigability arrow

indicates no connection from

Sale to Register.

(10)

Continuing – Adding Roles (if known)

Professor University

Employer Employee

Role Names

(11)

Adding Navigability and Dependency Relationships

1

Captures 1

endSale() enterItem() makePayment()

Register

ProductSpecification description : Text price : Money itemID: itemID

SaleLineItem quantity : Integer getSubtotal()

Payment amount : Money ProductCatalog

getSpecification()

Sale

becomeComplete() makeLineItem() makePayment() getTotal() Date : Date

isComplete : Boolean time : Time

address : Address name : Text

Store

addSale()

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1 1

1

1

*

* Uses

Houses

Looks-in

Contains

Contains

Describes

Logs-completed Paid-by

Illustrates non-attribute visibility

(12)

Iterative and Evolutionary Development

• Often compared with a sequential or waterfall approach that deals with early programming and testing of partial systems in repeated cycles.

• Iterations are started before all requirements are totally defined.

• Feedback on each iteration is used to lock in subsequent iterations.

• This approach is in stark contrast to waterfall approach that worked on defining requirements up front, then design, then programming.

• Many project failures are attributed to this big bang approach.

(13)

2.1 What is the UP?

• The Unified Process is a very popular iterative software development process.

• It is very popular for producing OOA/OOD systems

• The UP subscribes to best practices and is thus widely accepted in practice and widely understood.

• Interesting to note that other iterative procedures such as Extreme Programming and Scrum fit nicely within the UP.

• So why is the UP so important? (right from book)

– 1. The UP is an iterative process.

– 2. UP practices provide an example structure for how to do (and how to explain) OOA/OOD.

– 3. The UP is flexible and can be applied to lightweight and agile

approaches that include practices from other agile methods (again, such as

XP, Scrum, and others).

(14)

14

2.2 What is Iterative and Evolutionary Development?

• An iteration is a time-boxed (say 3 weeks) mini-project during which an increment of the software is developed.

– The increment is integrated into the current project.

– Each iteration has its own requirements, design, implementation, testing, etc.

• Each iteration therefore is made up of the following sequential activities:

requirements analysis, design, implementation and testing.

• The software is enlarged by increments and refined (and thus it evolves) as we go along via feedbacks: Iterative and Evolutionary Development.

• Application grows incrementally, iteration by iteration.

• Approach is known as iterative and incremental development.

• Also known as iterative and evolutionary development.

• Be careful! : an increment is not a prototype that sometimes work and sometimes doesn’t; it should represent a properly analysed, designed, coded and tested chunk of the future software (otherwise?)

• Consider the next slide.

(15)

15 Requirements

Design

Implementation &

Test & Integration

& More Design Final Integration

& System Test

Requirements Design

3 weeks (for example)

The system grows incrementally.

Feedback from iteration N leads to refinement and adaptation of the requirements and design in iteration N+1.

Iterations are fixed in length, or timeboxed.

Time

Implementation &

Test & Integration

& More Design Final Integration

& System Test

Fig 2.1 Iterative and Evolutionary Development

(16)

16

• Example of three-week agile iteration (may not always be suitable):

– The last iteration is debriefed and suggestion for process improvement are noted;

– Feedback from previous demonstrations and subsequent requests for change are integrated in this iteration;

– All artifacts (use cases, UML diagrams, code …) from the previous iteration are updated and synchronized with each other;

– Meeting clarifying the goals of the next iteration;

– Use cases may need to be refined;

– OOA is performed by the team (working by pairs via the UML using whiteboard and capturing outcomes using a digital camera;)

– OOD is performed by the team again (probably by pairs of staff members.) – Previous UML artifacts are updated;

– Most of the remaining days are spent on implementation and testing (with may be re- design if necessary);

– The last day should be spent tidying up and documenting;

– (Other project management activities such as demonstration, quality evaluation, personal issues etc. have not been detailed here)

– Measuring the success of the iteration against established criteria and assessment must

take place at the end of the iteration.

(17)

17

• There should be no rush to code nor long drawn-out all- detailed design phase : it is a project and team-dependent compromise.

• The result of each iteration is an executable (why is this important?) but incomplete system:

– Whatever done within an increment is part of the final system

– Increment should be high quality, suitable for release, production-grade code and documentation;

• You will not always get it right:

– Changing a previous iteration’s code or design is inevitable and will happen all the time (the nature of the changes are important.

– Unrealistic to believe that the code of an iteration will never change during an entire project;

– That’s about handling change during development;

(18)

18

Change and the Embracing of Change

• Change will be needed during a project because:

– What was done previously is never perfect (this is very common);

– Requirements are often misunderstood (this is very common);

– Requirements change (this is very common);

– New requirements are discovered…

• Change will occur and is common.

• The waterfall-way of dealing with this problem is to spend

enough time during analysis to ensure that the requirements are

perfect: this is generally impossible.

(19)

Change and the Embracing of Change

• The UP and all other iterative approaches (Agile or not) on the other hand try to embrace change:

– Each iteration looks at only one aspect of the project

– But done quickly and results in an executable and feedback.

• Entire detailed requirements do not need to be frozen:

– Each iteration and subsequent evaluation-feedback clarifies the

requirements that were looked at in previous iterations and also sheds light on the requirements of the future iterations.

– The requirements are clarified as we go along: a problem solving process.

– Hence, we term this an evolutionary process.

(20)

Change and the Embracing of Change

• Stakeholders usually have changing requirements.

• Each iteration involves choosing a small subset of the

requirements and quickly design, implement and testing them.

• This leads to rapid feedback, and an opportunity to modify or adapt understanding of the requirements or design.

• Also provides for developing increments of business value!

(21)

21

• But changes must not be major all the time:

– We mustn’t make major blunders in our design;

– Or completely misunderstand a requirement;

– Or accept requirement changes (new feature please!) from external sources (client, marketing department etc.) that require a re-design.

• Changes get more difficult to accommodate as project progresses

• We want properly managed iterations during which release-grade artifacts are produced

• Fig 2.2 tries to illustrate the evolutionary nature of an iterative

process.

(22)

22

Early iterations are farther from the "true path" of the system. Via feedback and adaptation, the system converges towards the most appropriate requirements and design.

In late iterations, a significant change in requirements is rare, but can occur. Such late changes may give an organization a competitive business advantage.

one iteration of design, implement, integrate, and test

Fig 2.2 Iterative feedback leads to an evolving system closer to the

‘real’ requirements

(23)

23

Benefits of Iterative Development (last)

– Early progress that can be evaluated;

– Early feedback, user engagement early clarifications of requirements that will bring us closer to the ‘real’ requirements;

– Complexity containment: we proceed by chuck;

– Early tackling of risks (technical, requirements, objectives, usability etc.) – Late total project failure less likely;

– Better productivity (especially when agile);

– Fewer defects;

(24)

24

Time Boxing and Feedback (1 of 2)

• Each iteration should be time-boxed between 2 to 6 weeks:

– If Longer: rapid feedback and adaptation is lost, complexity of task is probably too great, falls into waterfall;

– If Shorter: quality and documentation will suffer;

– Need a rhythm! Essential – What if we run out of time??

• If the manager feels that a deadline will not be met a recommended response

is to de-scope : remove tasks or requirements from the iteration and schedule

them to a future iteration, rather than slip the completion date (what do you

think?)

(25)

Time boxing and Feedback (2 of 2)

• The UP recommends short iteration lengths to allow for rapid feedback and adaptation.

• Long iterations increase project risk.

• Iterations are fixed in length (time boxed).

• UP recommends iterations between two and six weeks

• Time boxing is in contrast to Scope Boxing

References

Related documents

In respect of HKT Trust and HKT, as one or more of the applicable percentage ratios in respect of the Annual Caps for the transactions under the FWD Insurance Services

Travel Memories Travel Memories Travel Memories Travel Memories are elegant booklets delivered to Esatour customers in their hotel room: each Travel Memory is. an

In this regard, the role of public investment banks, both on the European and on the member state national levels, has been enhanced by recent EU-level initiatives. While

Support Define and share internal support available to other departments for all of Corporate Services on Freedom of Information and Privacy Protection Act (FOIPPA) regulations,

us.” 16 So they went with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the child lying in

By using Zoom Away by Tim Wynne-Jones, the works of Michael Kusugak, The Inukshuk Book , the two stories about polar bears, and the Nunavut workbook, your students will know all

based on the Pediatric Sleep Questionnaire (Chervin et al, 2000). •

Artiklene med nøytral eller ingen holdning er ofte artikler der offisielle kilder er benyttet for å gi informasjon om situasjonen, mens de positive artiklene ofte inneholder