UML and C++: A Practical Guide to Object-Oriented Development (2nd Edition)

Rating:
Summary: not really about UML; tries too hard at times to be profound
Review: (from my review in <a href="http://www.ercb.com/ddj/1997/ddj.9711.html">Doctor Dobbs Journal</a>) ...much of UML and C++ appears to have been written around, rather than about, the UML. For example, the authors talk about "object interaction diagrams" and "event trace diagrams," and only mention parenthetically or in a footnote that the UML calls these "collaboration diagrams" and "sequence diagrams," respectively. The authors' real focus is on their own object-oriented analysis and design methodology. ...every once in a while, I tripped over an unwelcome attempt at profundity, such as: If you take the Eastern, or Taoist, approach to object-oriented analysis, you will.not be concerned with the specific application that you are implementing. or: Taoist philosophy tells us to focus on capturing the objects in the problem domain rather than on the objects that will help us solve the immediate problem. Sadly, the authors don't tell us what Catholic or Sunni philosophy has to say about programming. It probably has something to do with the sinfulness of goto statements.

Rating:
Summary: Extremely misleading title
Review: Although the Authors have some intresting thoughts on OOD, I think there are better books to teach OOAD. I picked it up for UML, unfortunately that is not the focus of the book. I repeat that the book has an extremely misleading title. I have returned my copy.

Rating:
Summary: Good OO method design
Review: Clear description of modeling OO with a lot of tricks. Helpfull in moving from C to C++ world.

Rating:
Summary: Good Try at Applying UML to Real Applications
Review: For anyone that has to write computer programs for a living you realize quickly that UML is primarily an academic exercise in object oriented analysis and design but falls far short of being a practical tool for code development. Neither Java or C++ have solid components for dealing with UML concepts such as association, state models, aggregation, cardinality, and links. I agree that Lee's and Tefeharts book does not cover the UML concepts in detail and that's ok. There are hundreds of other books out there that already cover it. What they do provide is examples of how to take these theories and apply them within the constaints of the C++ language. Theory doesn't support my paycheck, practical coding does. Can you write a book on UML and Java now?

Rating:
Summary: Very good book on OOA&D...
Review: I agree with other reviewers. This book only occasionally mentioned UML. But I found this book to be an excellent book on OOA&D(with C++, not Java or other strange things like Effiel). That's why I still give it four stars. Covers both conceptual and practical aspects very well. A perfect doorway to the OO world(maybe a little overstating).

Rating:
Summary: OOA&D using C++ is probably a more fitting title
Review: I don't why this book is named UML and C++. From the title I expected a detailed description of UML. But it is all about Object Oriented Analysis and Design and how to implement it using C++. The authors use UML to document their designs but there is not even a chapter detailing UML. If you are looking for a book to find out about UML go somewhere else. But if you are trying to learn about OOA&D and using C++ to implement object oriented designs, this is a very good book. This is probably better than most books about object oriented design in C++.

Rating:
Summary: Just a haphazard collection of thoughts on OOA&D
Review: I had the displeasure of having to buy this book for an OOA&D class tailored to using UML 1.1 notation. Its treatment of ,or lack there of, use case analysis and modeling is atrocious. I found it very difficult to read because its too busy trying to be abstract. Its treatment of OOA&D processes, tasks, and procedures is just too random and in some chapters too brief to be of much use. I ended up buying the UML Toolkit and found it much better at teaching OOA&D using UML 1.1 than this one. The book was definitely a disappointment.

Rating:
Summary: Should be "Impractical" guide UML OOAD with C++
Review: I was very disappointed with this book. At least through the 150+ pages I struggled through before giving up, UML was barely covered and utilized. What passed for an example was convoluted and confusing. Some bizarre quotes may convey the tone of this book: "This is consistent with our phenomenalist view: ... dialectical process ... we believe the real world of objects is a reflection of social relations ..." "If you take the Eastern, or Taoist, approach to OOA, ... the Taoist (practitioner) ... the focus is on the path rather than the destination" Explaining is-a: "Generalization has its roots in the knowledge-representation paradigm used in ai ... psychological model of associative memory ... representing a semantic knowledge network" "meronymic relationships" "homeomorphic" "anyone who has studied philosophy knows that reality is the state of mind of each individual"

Rating:
Summary: Should be "Impractical" guide UML OOAD with C++
Review: I was very disappointed with this book. At least through the 150+ pages I struggled through before giving up, UML was barely covered and utilized. What passed for an example was convoluted and confusing. Some bizarre quotes may convey the tone of this book: "This is consistent with our phenomenalist view: ... dialectical process ... we believe the real world of objects is a reflection of social relations ..." "If you take the Eastern, or Taoist, approach to OOA, ... the Taoist (practitioner) ... the focus is on the path rather than the destination" Explaining is-a: "Generalization has its roots in the knowledge-representation paradigm used in ai ... psychological model of associative memory ... representing a semantic knowledge network" "meronymic relationships" "homeomorphic" "anyone who has studied philosophy knows that reality is the state of mind of each individual"

Rating:
Summary: The worse book I've ever read
Review: I would give it 0 point if that's available. I think the authors are idots who are not clear about what they wanted to write. Don't buy it!