Hi,
While loading one of my existing models, I remarked that
the semantics of FAMIXReference have been changed: earlier it
was an association between two containers and hence much more
permissive. Now it is an association between a method (from
side) and a type (to side).
Although I agree that the semantics are clearer, sometimes
we have the need to represent an association/dependency
between two entities. It happens because we are reading from a
abstracted source of information (e.g. a description of the
model from a modelling tool) that does not have the code-level
details.
So it will be good to have a more generic dependency.
Hence, the question:
1. Does it make sense to add a generic dependency (between
two containers? sourced entities?)?
2. Should it be named FAMIXDependency as the word
dependency can have different meanings to different people
(all dependencies of an entity may be its "computed"
dependencies from the dependencies of its children or
aggregate of all types of dependencies e.g. accesses,
invocations, etc.). So, we need to be careful about the
naming.
With moose-chef, I would have to tell which entities have
this dependency for correct computation of the dependencies
but with MooseQuery, we should not have this problem because
this information is inferred from the meta-model, right?
regards.
Usman