OOA '20 Questions: (Inter-domain) Messages

Home Forums Executable UML and xtUML Methodology OOA '20 Questions: (Inter-domain) Messages


Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
Author Posts
Author Posts
September 26, 2019 at 1:45 pm #6288

Lee Riemenschneider

Method: System Modeling

(Inter-domain) Messages

synchronous and asynchronous
Should there be a distinction between synchronous and asynchronous messages between domains? If so, what are the semantic differences?
Should senders block on transmission of synchronous inter-domain messages returning no data (void)?

[Scenario] Consider domains ‘navigation’ and ‘braking’. A statement within the
the interior of a state action of an instance state machine in ‘navigation’ sends
the ‘apply friction’ message (invokes a terminator service) on ‘braking’.
See Action Semantics for the UML for discussion on intra-domain messaging

September 27, 2019 at 4:04 pm #6305

Lee Riemenschneider

Let’s start with some definitions:
Synchronous messaging – call and wait until completion
Asynchronous messaging – call and continue

If we can agree on these, then there is a very definite advantage in the analyst knowing which kind of messaging is being performed, so there should be a designation applied for all accessors (bridges, events, class operations) that can support either type of messaging.
“void” is just an indication of no return value, and if used to imply a messaging type, then another term would need to be invented for no return value.
As the block on transmission is implied by the definition of a synchronous message, it should be expected when the analyst chooses to call a synchronous bridge. However, it is possible to override this behavior in the architecture for specific platforms. This would need to be done with caution, as the model is obviously intending something to be completed.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.