1 Feb
2008
1 Feb
'08
8:38 a.m.
We already have incoming/outgoing invocations, and incoming accesses.
So, for naming consistency we thought of outgoing inheritances. In all
these cases, the client has outgoing arrows and the client has
incoming arrows.
The goal is to have a naming scheme that can be generalized. This also
would help to add some more descriptive attributes, like
"withinParent", so that you can form outgoingInvocationsWithinParent
or something like that. Stef's group struggled quite a bit with these
issues, and I think it would pay off to have a naming scheme that is
more uniform.
Does it make more sense from this perspective?
Doru
On Feb 1, 2008, at 8:27 AM, Oscar Nierstrasz wrote:
If you are consistent with UML convention, then A -> B means A
(client) is a subclass of B (provider). Arrows (almost) always go
from client to provider. (The only exceptions are in the case that
arrows are used to represent data or control flow.)
(Why "incoming" and "outgoing" inheritance? Means nothing to me! I
"inherit" from my grandfather; I don't have "incoming" or
"outgoing"
inheritance to him! ;-)
- on
On Feb 1, 2008, at 8:10, Tudor Girba wrote:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.tudorgirba.com/blog
"It's not what we do that matters most, it's how we do it."
I = A -> B, I is the inheritance definition
between A, B such that:
- I subclass = A
- I superclass = B
- A outgoingInheritance includes I,
- B incomingInheritance includes I.
I think the confusion is because we actually never used the
incomingInheritance and outgoingInheritance, because these are
derived, and before we only saved in MSE underived attributes. So,
before we only counted on the subclass and superclass definitions,
and
they are the correct ones.
But in the latest version it is fixed.
Doru
On Feb 1, 2008, at 12:17 AM, Adrian Kuhn wrote:
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev I dont understand, is it as follows?
A superclass
B subclass
cheers,
AA
On 31 Jan 2008, at 21:20 , Tudor Girba wrote:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.tudorgirba.com/blog
"Value is always contextual."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev If A -> B, it should mean that
- A has an outgoingInheritance to B, and
- B has an incomingInheritance from A.
I fixed the descriptions now.
Doru
On Jan 31, 2008, at 7:38 PM, Adrian Kuhn wrote:
> Which one is the superclass and which one the subclass? The
> current
> implementation of Moose seems to do the opposite of the Famix
> spec,
> so which one is right? ^^
>
> AA
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.tudorgirba.com/blog
"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
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev