Good point.
MSE is a subset of EMOF, so all our models can be transformable to EMOF compliant models without lose of infromation.
The other way round: I only removed stuff not used in Famix, and beyond that, well .. there are some more constraints on what we can accept, for example multiple inheritance will have to be flattened etcetera.
Currently, there is a ch.akuhn.mse.generation.Transformation class that transforms EMOF compliant models to MSE compliant models.
AA
On 10 Oct 2007, at 13:27 , Frank Buchli wrote:
Hi Adrian
EMOF has the advantage that it is nowadays a quasi standard. Dealing with a new model makes it easier to realize your new ideas, making performance optimization, etc. but harder to interact / exchange with other tools. Consider this while making your decision.
All the best
Frank
Adrian Kuhn wrote:
Dear Moosers,
I was pondering over Famix and found that it only uses 20% of EMOF's features. As it seems, the E in EMOF is not really standing for essential :)
What I came up with when porting MSE to Java, is a much simpler mmmodel.
I documented it on the wiki
http://smallwiki.unibe.ch/moose/mse/msemmmodel/
would be nice to make this the new mmmodel of moose and get rid of all the EMOF bloat.
by the way, a Java implementation is in its first draft, if you are interested contact me.
cheers, AA _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev