2 Oct
2014
2 Oct
'14
7:13 p.m.
It may be a problem since when you want to analyse a package, you may not want to pull
with him all the subclasses that are in other package. Moreover, we don’t have the same
behavior in all languages (for example, in java and ST).
It is possible to choose not pulling the method extension, it could be good to have the
same opportunity while creating an mse from ST code not dragging all the subclasses when
they are stub, no ?
Cheers,
Anne
Le 2 oct. 2014 à 17:07, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> a écrit :
I understand that the rational behind this, is to
populate stubs with the maximum amount of information.
Is this a problem however?
Cheers,
Alexandre
On Oct 2, 2014, at 6:39 AM, Damien Cassou <damien.cassou(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
Imagine I have a package Super with a class Super and a package Sub
with a class Sub that inherits from Super.
If I create a moose model of the package Super, I get the class Sub as
a stub. I find that very surprising: why are all subclasses of the
system included in the model. The semantics of the inheritance
relation is one-way: a class knows its super class, not the opposite.
Can somebody explain why subclasses are included in the analyses?
--
Damien Cassou
http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without
losing enthusiasm."
Winston Churchill
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
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