You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
some questions regarding correct style (might need extra consultation with tutor):
imported libraries needed for UML? --> No, only classes that we created
some Objects are created by JS internally, they are always just instances of Object. Is it okay to give them names just for the UML even though that is not entirely accurate?
usually an entry point of an application is the main() or run() method (I believe), is it ok to pretend the existence of such just for UML?
stick to exact structure of JS objects (public variables of object) or pretend that there are actual getters/setters and design UML accordingly? --> Indication of getters setters would be preferable, just having a public attribute without explanation in UML is bad practice
what name is best for the numerical variables? float,double,number...?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Yours is visually definetly more appealing, though.
In my opinion the lines from Index.js should be "-->" indicating dependency rather than association
Here is a first version of the uml class diagram for this application (needs still some improvements, contains open questions):
![klassendiagramm_alpha_v1](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/96131559/160893464-d7acfe4e-c439-4991-b1c7-c1da0571db23.png)
editable file, if needed: klassendiagramm.zip
some questions regarding correct style (might need extra consultation with tutor):
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: