FAMIXInclude overrides #from and #to, and when doing so, they also change the type of the property.

FAMIXInclude>>from
<MSEProperty: #from type: #FAMIXFile opposite: #includingFiles>
^ from

FAMIXAssociation>>from

<MSEProperty: #from type: #FAMIXNamedEntity> <derived>

^ self subclassResponsibility

The property is marked as <derived> in the superclass, and this means that the value should come from somewhere else. Essentially, #from and #to are just polymorphic properties, and are not meant to store the concrete value.

I now changed the code to have:

- FAMIXInclude not depend on from/to properties, but instead on new source/target ones.

- introduced incomingIncludeRelations/outgoingIncludeRelations in FAMIXCFile.

In the process, I also found that other places completely messed up the from/to definitions:

FAMIXInvocation>>from

<MSEProperty: #sender type: #FAMIXBehaviouralEntity opposite: #outgoingInvocations>

<MSEComment: 'Behavioural entity making the call. from-side of the association'>

^ self sender

One clear point here is that we need more constraints and tools to guide newcomers. I will follow up on that.

On Jul 2, 2016, at 4:43 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:

Hi,

I went quickly through the changes from the FAMIX-C package. The Multivalue code looks good.

Here are two remarks:

1. I am not convinced about having CompilationUnit and Header be subclasses of CFile (which is a subclass of File). But, to make an opinion I would first like to see a model. @Alex, could you provide a simple MSE model to play with?

2. I would want to change is the names of the following two properties:

FAMIXCFile>>includedInFiles
<MSEProperty: #includedInFiles type: #FAMIXInclude opposite: #includesFiles> <multivalued> <derived>
<MSEComment: 'includedInFiles relationships, i.e. files that includes this file.'>
^ includedInFiles

FAMIXCFile>>includesFiles
<MSEProperty: #includesFiles type: #FAMIXInclude opposite: #includedInFiles> <multivalued> <derived>
<MSEComment: 'includesFiles relationships, i.e. files included by this file.'>
^ includingFiles

The names suggest that the result will be a collection of File objects, but it is actually a collection of Includes.

It is a bit tricky to name these selectors, but we could use the same convention we used for invocations, and we could have:
- includedInFiles ==> incomingIncludeRelations
- includesFiles ==> outgoingIncludeRelations

What do you think?

Cheers,
Doru

--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com

"To lead is not to demand things, it is to make them happen."

--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com

"Next time you see your life passing by, say 'hi' and get to know her."