On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 22:14 +0200, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Ross,
On 16 Jun 2010, at 21:17, Ross Boylan wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 09:37 +0200, Tudor Girba wrote:
As mentioned before, there is no support for graphical support for writing MSE files. The main reason here is that Smalltalk already provides a good enough solution for quickly building classes and methods, and annotating them is a practical solution.
I gather there is no facility to generate the smalltalk out of the method annotations. Is there any reason, in principle, that it couldn't be done?
Well, if you have the method annotations, you already have the Smalltalk code :).
Consider RPGDragon>>hoard <MSEProperty: #hoard type: #RPGTreasure opposite: #keeper> <multivalued> ^hoard ^hoard is smalltalk code. You also have to create the instance variable, define hoard: aTreasure hoard value: aTreasure and initialize super initialize. hoard := FMMultivalueLink on: self opposite: #keeper:. killedBy := FMMultiMultivalueLink on: self opposite: #kills.
It's the redundancy, along with the possibilities for error that would put the smalltalk and annotation out of sync, that concerns me (and that I'm trying to avoid).
I do not in some other classes the names in the annotations and the names of the methods and variables are not quite in sync, so maybe this is a feature. Ross
Right now, the only possibility is to generate Smalltalk code out of MSE code that represents your meta-model. This is like the famixCore string that you saw in the image.
Cheers, Doru
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev