Model-driven and pattern-based development

This article on TheServerSide.Net gives a good perspective about what is really happening with MDA.

Comments

• Anonymous
  January 20, 2005
  I have to admit that I do agree with this report 100%.
  
  At this current moment in-time I am the principle software architect at the beginning of a very important software development for my company and I find myself dreading the thought of spending many weeks producing many UML diagrams that are pretty much worthless in the end.
  
• Anonymous
  January 22, 2005
  It saddens me to see influential reports missing the point:
  
  "With generation-based approaches, there is little flexibility and more fuss about the generation process. When companies commit themselves 100% to code generation, there is little room for tweaking, especially when developers always have to go through their model, Zetie said."
  
  A central underpinning of a translation based approach is that the translation rules can - and should - be tuned to meet needs. Wanting to edit generated code makes as much sense as editing the output from a compiler.
  
  [It's also sad to see authors such as yourself trumpeting this as vindication of MDA being wrong, when the book you co-author makes the point above explicitly. Guess that's marketing...].
• Anonymous
  January 24, 2005
  Scott - I think the article is well-grounded in what people are actually doing today. Another quotation from it is:
  
  "By designing and coding around a particular design pattern, developers have greater flexibility to modify or diverge from generated code as they see fit and are no longer constrained to generate code simply based on an abstract model."
  
  Yes, of course you can tune the translation rules as well. But 100% generation will be the exception rather than the rule, for the forseeable future.
  
  -- Steve
  
• Anonymous
  January 26, 2005
  The comment has been removed