UML Representation of Type Passed as a Parameter

An association links one class to another to indicate a relation between them. For example, you have an association between Customer and Order which (with no further information) indicates that:

1. A customer can have an order or maybe several orders,

2. An order can belong to a customer or maybe shared by several customers.

The diagram in your question gives an additional info: there is one and only one customer by order, and zero or more orders by customer, so the rules become:

1. A customer have zero or more orders,

2. An order belongs to one and one only customer.

While aggregation is used in the association between Order and OrderDetail, it's not used in the association between Customer and Order. This is done to indicate the life cycle dependency. If an instance of the Order is destroyed, all instances of OrderDetail inside it would be destroyed too; on the other hand, the instances of Order are independent of the life cycle of the Customer instance, thus no aggregation here.

This doesn't mean that an order can exist without a customer: the 1 ↔ 0..* association explicitly forbids the orders which have no customers. The difference between a 1 ↔ 0..* association and the aggregation really happens on life cycle level.

Create a stereotype that you can attach to the "class" classifier, e.g., <<global function>>. You can then create a single stereotyped "class" for each global function containing one fully specified static operation.

The stereotype I propose tells the person reading the diagram to interpret the classifier as a function. The rectangle (with the stereotype) on a given diagram would represent a single function, while its dependencies represent the dependencies of that single function.