8 Nov
2008
8 Nov
'08
8:51 a.m.
Hi guys
do you imagine that in fact the possibility to merge or not a class
and metaclass
is available since at least two years. So I do not really understand
what you are talking
about. Now I want to fix the lack of import of class variables and
also a bug I found
about instance variable of the class and the metaclass when merging.
Stef
Hi,
I think we should always merge the instance and class side. The reason
is that I have never felt the need to have them separated in FAMIX,
because analyses are usually meant to be language independent. Anyone
else actually had a different experience?
Distinguishing between the types of methods and variables should be
just enough, and we can kind of do it from a language independent
point of view. I think that should be enough.
Also, if you have the instance/class sides separated you will
certainly have different results for analyses than if you have them
merged, regardless of what you do with the variables.
Cheers,
Doru
On Nov 7, 2008, at 9:00 PM, Michele Lanza wrote:
I'm not sure whether merging is the right way
to go. One argument in
favor is that otherwise one ends up having a model full of "empty"
metaclasses, as the large majority of metaclasses do not implement
any
methods. Visually this results in a system complexity view with dual
inheritance hierarchies. One argument against is that if a metaclass
does implement methods, in the case of a merge, the metaclass methods
would be mixed up with the "normal" methods (of course you would
still
be able to differentiate them within the model). Merging would just
be
trying to make up one (of the very few) shortcoming(s) of Smalltalk's
design. With respect to shared variables, that's another thing that I
think is a bit overengineered..
Cheers
Michele
On 7-Nov-08, at 8:42 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.tudorgirba.com/blog
"Value is always contextual."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > As
far as I can see, an analysis may depend on whether you merge
> classes and metaclasses.
> It seems hard to imagine than any analysis should be depend on
> whether
> there is such a merging.
you mean independent?
If we have the same data represented the same way independently of
merging
we favor that an analysis code does have to have different cases
based
on merging
or not?
Maybe there is something I misunderstood. Merging classes and
metaclasses when importing means that one single class will
represent
both the class and its metaclass I guess.
This means that there will be twice less classes in a model. A
system
complexity view on a imported (using merging) smalltalk application
will be different than the one with no merging.
No?
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev