>
> This would not work well at the moment because MooseGroupRuntimeStorage is used also for all moose groups. We would need to have a storage that is less demanding for handling associations, and then we could rely on having name for everything.
>
> Doru

Hi Doru,

Most elements we have a unique name, and we should be able to find them (fast) by using the lookup. This is what "at: ifAbsent:" implies. I don't think this method can be used on an entity that does not have a unique name. There is only one problem:
        1) either we assert that a change in the moose name is not possible. This means that if we have a cache miss, we should execute the exception block.
        2) Or we assume that a change in the moose name is possible. This means that we have to check if we have a cache hit, and have to go through all elements if we have a cache miss.

Currently the implementation is a bit heuristic, returning if we have a cache hit, and adding when we go through all elements. My problem is that the tests rely on this "mixed" behavior. So … I do not understand why it was built this way.

When I look at the implementation of MooseEntity mooseName, it uses a privateState to cache the mooseName, but it returns before it actually stores it. And removing the return statement causes a lot of tests to fail. So this means that the Moose name changes …

Diego

_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev