From fa68ca7d00d3fbd538b3c69ed6bc1f2ea31751b1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: adrian-s02 Date: Sun, 19 May 2024 18:48:32 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Update Exercise05-Task3-XModeler-en.sbv --- .../Blatt05/Exercise05-Task3-XModeler-en.sbv | 64 +++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) diff --git a/Uebungen/Blatt05/Exercise05-Task3-XModeler-en.sbv b/Uebungen/Blatt05/Exercise05-Task3-XModeler-en.sbv index af6a320..a3e9da2 100644 --- a/Uebungen/Blatt05/Exercise05-Task3-XModeler-en.sbv +++ b/Uebungen/Blatt05/Exercise05-Task3-XModeler-en.sbv @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ 0:00:01.100,0:00:09.160 This is exercise five, task three. I'm going -to use xmodeler software to solve it. I'm +to use XModeler software to solve it. I'm 0:00:09.160,0:00:23.630 going to create a project. Let's call it e5t3. @@ -43,19 +43,19 @@ constraints are basically. We're going to see this now. Okay, let me do the first class 0:01:27.150,0:02:36.150 -diagram. So, we have A, B, C and D. (35 sec) -A subclass of B. (22 sec) There's an association +diagram. So, we have A, B, C and D. +A is a subclass of B. There's an association 0:02:36.150,0:03:12.040 -between C and D. (11 sec) And it is 1 to 1. -(15 sec) There is an association between A +between C and D. And it is 1 to 1. +There is an association between A 0:03:12.040,0:04:01.709 -and C. (10 sec) And it is an aggregation. -(32 sec) There is an association between B +and C. And it is an aggregation. +There is an association between B 0:04:01.709,0:04:25.710 -and D, and it is an aggregation. (19 sec) +and D, and it is an aggregation. And just like that we have the first class 0:04:25.710,0:04:34.900 @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ they're connected with some kind of association. 0:04:43.320,0:05:03.740 Let's try this here. Now, let's make an A -and a C. Instance. (5 sec) Okay, no warnings, +and a C instance. Okay, no warnings, 0:05:03.740,0:05:10.080 nothing happened. So far. So, good. Let's @@ -99,8 +99,8 @@ It is because of this association here. And we have options, we can actually make the 0:06:24.770,0:06:33.030 -software ignore this issue for a while. But -we can do-, we can consider the constraints +software ignore this issue for a while. +We can consider the constraints, 0:06:33.030,0:06:40.090 we can do it correctly by either creating @@ -156,14 +156,14 @@ we can continue let's do the rest of the object 0:08:14.789,0:08:30.849 diagrams and the other class diagram. Let -me remove this one. (8 sec) Let's try the +me remove this one. Let's try the 0:08:30.849,0:08:45.580 other one. We have B, C and D connected to each other. Let's do this. Not a MetaClass, 0:08:45.580,0:09:17.510 -should be an instance. (10 sec) So, just like +should be an instance. So, just like the previous case, we have this association 0:09:17.510,0:09:31.579 @@ -179,7 +179,7 @@ it automatically named it as aggr2. So, it recognizes that we are doing this one here 0:09:53.250,0:09:59.180 -and now finally, we have link between B and +and now finally, we have a link between B and C, let's try to do this here. So, link from 0:09:59.180,0:10:06.550 @@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ This is true, there is no link between something 0:10:17.540,0:10:26.610 of class B and something of class C. If this -B-, this B that we have here, if it (?were) +B that we have here, if it was 0:10:26.610,0:10:35.100 a specific type of B, which is some A, a subclass @@ -208,26 +208,26 @@ B and C. And the software is recognizing this 0:10:45.310,0:11:42.000 fact. Now let's do the third object diagram, -we have A, B, C, D. (45 sec) And we see that +we have A, B, C, D. And we see that 0:11:42.000,0:11:50.570 this one fits, everything is fine. This one got recognized and is aggr1, this one got 0:11:50.570,0:11:58.440 -recognized two, this is aggr2, this is the +recognized too, this is aggr2, this is the association that was enforced. Everything's 0:11:58.440,0:12:58.680 fine. Now let's do class diagram D, the fourth -class diagram we have A, C, D. (1 min) Right +class diagram, we have A, C, D. Right 0:12:58.680,0:13:16.990 so, this one fits to everything's fine. Let's do the last one. We have A, D, D, we have 0:13:16.990,0:13:52.960 -two D’s. (29 sec) And it is enforcing the +two D’s. And it is enforcing the existence of C because of the same association, 0:13:52.960,0:14:02.510 @@ -243,20 +243,20 @@ first one. We have this aggregation, we just need to change the multiplicity here. We have 0:14:19.230,0:17:23.120 -this aggregation but instead of going to A -it's from-, it's with C and B. (2 min 53 sec) +this aggregation but instead of going to A, +it's with C and B. 0:17:23.120,0:17:30.251 There's a problem here, I meant to edit this one for some reason it edited this one. Let's 0:17:30.251,0:19:23.790 -fix it. (1 min 9 sec) Let's do the first one. -A and C. (41 sec) So, as soon as we created +fix it. Let's do the first one. +A and C. So, as soon as we created 0:19:23.790,0:19:35.100 an A, it required two D’s. Because and A -is inheriting. And A is a B so it’s inheriting +is inheriting. An A is a B so it’s inheriting 0:19:35.100,0:19:40.110 this aggregation here and this aggregation @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ does not fit. The first one does not fit. 0:19:50.190,0:20:21.980 Let's do the second one. We have B C D connected -to each other. (22 sec) And now is enforcing +to each other. And now it is enforcing 0:20:21.980,0:20:31.730 the existence of a D. So, we have a D here, @@ -279,11 +279,11 @@ another D, for this instance of B. And this does not exist. So, we can already see that 0:20:37.380,0:20:51.820 -it's not fitting, let's continue, let's try. +it's not fitting, but let's continue, let's try. The object B requires a link to an instance 0:20:51.820,0:20:58.929 -of D at level 0. You tell it, Okay, let's +of D at level 0. You tell it, okay, let's choose the same D here, that D that we already 0:20:58.929,0:21:19.750 @@ -291,8 +291,8 @@ have. It does not accept. You see it? So, it wants us to create another D. 0:21:19.750,0:21:29.300 -And then it's says B requires 0, so we choose -the d1 this new d. And now it stops complaining. +And then it's says B requires a link to an instance at level 0 +so we choose the d1 this new d. And now it stops complaining. 0:21:29.300,0:21:36.270 But now it's already different from what we @@ -300,7 +300,7 @@ have here. Here we have one D. And here we 0:21:36.270,0:21:52.200 have two D’s. So, the answer is it does -not fit. Let's do the third one. (7 sec) A, +not fit. Let's do the third one. A, 0:21:52.200,0:22:09.679 B, C, D. Again, as soon as we create an A, @@ -331,12 +331,12 @@ So, we must have two Ds, but here we have just one and now here the last one. Let's 0:22:55.861,0:23:03.059 -do the last one. We have A and existence of +do the last one. We have A, and the existence of A requires the existence of two D’s. This 0:23:03.059,0:23:43.539 is fine. Let's see if there are any further -problems. (33 sec) And that's it. Nothing +problems. And that's it. Nothing 0:23:43.539,0:23:49.820 else is being enforced. Nothing is required.