26 Sep
2010
26 Sep
'10
11:47 a.m.
Ok I see your point.
What would be nice is to see how you could have fame and the core of Magritte merged so
that
we can use
Fame
and
Magritte could be build/described using Fame
this way we could use Fame serialization
for famix
but also magritte
So may be this is the time to have Magritte 3 based on pragmas and using Fame/magritte
core as Magritte3 Core
Stef
Le 25 sept. 2010 à 21:50, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit :
I am just wondering why I must use two languages to describe a metamodel with
constraints.
If I want to express a language structure I must use Fame (to have package, classes,
properties).
If I want to add constraints I must use Magritte.
But when I define Magritte descriptions, I feel like I rewrite the same stuff I did in
Fame (except for the validation part).
Yes, but it is still missing editing tools compared to EMF, or am I wrong ?
I want to describe a language only one time and be able to use tools from Fame and
Magritte.
So with a minimal amount of work, I get serialization, edition, validation, code
generation.
On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:20 PM, François Tanguy wrote:
I would like to edit models in the web browser with seaside components generated with
Magritte and save the models using Fame.
Would it be a good idea to have a bridge between
the two ?
I do not know what is your scenario? Like generating magritte descriptions from the
Fame pragmas.
do you have an example?
because you mean describing Magritte in fame? Then we could imagine to have a generic editor
for a metamodel and serialization... (like in EMF)
fame already support the functionality of EMF.
I think that Fame should stay a simple metametamodel.
I wrote a very basic piece of code that does the
transformation from Fame to Magritte in some very specific use case and that is something
that is definitely possible.
What do you think ?
I do not know. what is your need?
Stef
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Le 25 sept. 2010 à 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit :
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev here is my summary
fame is a minimal meta meta model ( 4 or 5 classes): we use it describe other model (such
as Famix)
based on fame you can load and save model.
Magritte is a meta data driven framework.
you describe specific entity and the tools interpret it.
On Sep 25, 2010, at 11:24 AM, François Tanguy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> being a end user, I am bit confused with these 2 frameworks: Fame and Magritte.
> There are both meta-meta-models. So what make them different from a conceptual point
of view ?
>
> For my models, I would like to have the persistency for free (from Fame) and the UI
edition and model validation for free (from Magritte).
>
> Today I must write two times the description of my language (one in Fame and one in
Magritte), and it feels like I would need only one description.
>
> Any info on this would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Francois
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev