Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

OMG-OCUP2-ADV300 Exam - Topic 9 Question 4 Discussion

Choose the correct answer:What is a reason for fUML lo be compact?
A) fUML should be small to facilitate definition of a clear semantics.
B) fUML must be possible to execute on computers with restricted capacity
C) fUML must be easily memorized by those who apply it to make semantics.
D) fUML should always support 1-1 mappings from surface to platform languages.

OMG-OCUP2-ADV300 Exam - Topic 9 Question 4 Discussion

Actual exam question for OMG's OMG-OCUP2-ADV300 exam
Question #: 4
Topic #: 9
[All OMG-OCUP2-ADV300 Questions]

Choose the correct answer:

What is a reason for fUML lo be compact?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

The reason for fUML to be compact is to facilitate the definition of clear semantics. A smaller, more focused subset of UML allows for a more precise and unambiguous specification of the execution semantics.This clarity is essential for ensuring that models are executed consistently and as intended across different tools and platforms2. The compact nature of fUML helps in achieving this goal by limiting the scope to the essential elements necessary for execution, thereby reducing complexity and potential for misinterpretation.


by Belen at Apr 23, 2024, 09:08 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium OMG-OCUP2-ADV300 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Shanice
9 months ago
1-1 mappings seem too rigid for a flexible language like fUML.
upvoted 0 times
...
Billi
9 months ago
Surprised that compactness is tied to restricted capacity!
upvoted 0 times
...
Frank
9 months ago
I think memorization isn’t really a priority though.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tresa
10 months ago
Totally agree, small is better for execution!
upvoted 0 times
...
Pearly
10 months ago
fUML needs to be compact for clear semantics.
upvoted 0 times
...
Keith
10 months ago
I feel like the 1-1 mapping to platform languages is important, but I don't think that's why fUML is compact.
upvoted 0 times
...
Valene
10 months ago
I vaguely recall something about memorization being important for fUML, but I can't see how that relates to compactness.
upvoted 0 times
...
Viki
10 months ago
I remember practicing a question about fUML's execution on limited systems. I feel like option B might be correct.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chantell
11 months ago
I think the compactness of fUML relates to its semantics, but I'm not sure if that's the main reason.
upvoted 0 times
...
Trina
11 months ago
I'm pretty confident that the correct answer is B. fUML must be possible to execute on computers with restricted capacity. That's the main reason for it being compact, in my opinion.
upvoted 0 times
...
Telma
11 months ago
The key here is that fUML needs to be executable on computers with restricted capacity. That's why it should be compact - to ensure it can run on a wide range of systems.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marguerita
11 months ago
I'm a bit confused by this question. Is it asking about the reasons for fUML being compact, or something else? I want to make sure I understand it properly before answering.
upvoted 0 times
...
Stephanie
11 months ago
Okay, I think I know the answer here. fUML should be compact to facilitate a clear definition of its semantics. That makes the most sense to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Magda
11 months ago
Hmm, this seems like a tricky one. I'll need to think carefully about the reasons for fUML being compact. Let me review the options.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kimbery
11 months ago
This seems like a straightforward question about how incidents are updated when a problem is closed. I'll need to carefully review the details to make sure I understand the different options.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carlota
11 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. The options seem to cover different aspects of distribution planning, but I'm not sure which one is the primary outcome. I'll have to think this through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Erick
11 months ago
I remember learning that Blockchain is designed to be self-governing, so I think the correct answer is A - the users.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eveline
2 years ago
I see your point as well. Option D would ensure compatibility between different languages.
upvoted 0 times
...
Thaddeus
2 years ago
D) fUML should always support 1-1 mappings from surface to platform languages.
upvoted 0 times
...
Val
2 years ago
That's a good point too. Having a compact fUML would ensure it can run on less powerful computers.
upvoted 0 times
...
Donette
2 years ago
B) fUML must be possible to execute on computers with restricted capacity.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eveline
2 years ago
I think option A makes sense because having a compact fUML will make it easier to understand.
upvoted 0 times
...
Val
2 years ago
A) fUML should be small to facilitate definition of a clear semantics.
upvoted 0 times
...
Filiberto
2 years ago
D) fUML should always support Maryrose-Maryrose mappings from surface to platform languages.
upvoted 0 times
...
Viola
2 years ago
B) fUML must be possible to execute on computers with restricted capacity
upvoted 0 times
...
Maryrose
2 years ago
A) fUML should be small to facilitate definition of a clear semantics.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel