23 Nov
2009
23 Nov
'09
11:50 p.m.
On 23 nov. 2009, at 18:20, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Simon,
I would suggest to add a FAMIXTrait and have the flattening
mechanism in the FAMIXClass>>methods.
Well I choose the path of least resistance and dont care about traits
for now :)
After all traits are conceived to not get into our ways and they did
just fine.
I added a low priority issue just in case someone wants to model trait
in Famix
Actually it's an excellent item for the day we reimplement Famix with
traits :)
Cheers,
Doru
On 23 Nov 2009, at 19:48, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
--
Simon
yeap!
Stef
On Nov 23, 2009, at 3:47 AM, Simon Denier wrote:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"In a world where everything is moving ever faster,
one might have better chances to win by moving slower."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev Hi there
I started to work on issue 227 and it is quite simple but
problematic. Basically when we send PackageInfo>>classes, it
returns regular classes and traits. There is no way to ask
directly for the regular classes.
Now since traits are flattened in their user classes, there is no
behavior lost if I ignore them in the importer (esp. since for now
there is no representation of traits in Famix).
With this in mind, I updated the Lan model to use a trait, with
the goal to not change the properties of the model and the tests.
But the tests break because the Lan package has one more 'class'
which is the trait.
Do I continue and update the tests to ignore the trait?
--
Simon
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev