[Moose-dev] Re: About instance variable metaclass

I understand where this is coming from (basically everybody [including myself] using Moose thinks that metaclasses are noise most of the time, and one of the first things you do, is to "remove" them from the model). However, if I think back to the possibly only major reverse engineering experience on a very large Smalltalk system (the MediaGenix system back in 2001) there we produced a couple of views only about the (dark) class side, one of the questions being "where have they gone meta in the system?". The language independence is a valid argument, but following this line of thought there you have the reason why Java interfaces are still being modeled as classes where one has to use a couple of methods (e.g., isClass, etc.) to establish what they actually are. Coming back to Smalltalk, it looks like one would be giving up on details that are there already, just for the sake of language independence. And yes, the views about the dark side could also be produced if the instance and class side are merged, it just takes a bit longer, and makes the creation/conception of such views less obvious. Cheers Michele On 8-Nov-08, at 12:32 AM, Tudor Girba wrote: > Hi, > > I think we should always merge the instance and class side. The > reason > is that I have never felt the need to have them separated in > FAMIX, > because analyses are usually meant to be language independent. > Anyone > else actually had a different experience? > > Distinguishing between the types of methods and variables should > be > just enough, and we can kind of do it from a language independent > point of view. I think that should be enough. > > Also, if you have the instance/class sides separated you will > certainly have different results for analyses than if you have > them > merged, regardless of what you do with the variables. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > On Nov 7, 2008, at 9:00 PM, Michele Lanza wrote: > >> I'm not sure whether merging is the right way to go. One argument >> in >> favor is that otherwise one ends up having a model full of >> "empty" >> metaclasses, as the large majority of metaclasses do not >> implement >> any >> methods. Visually this results in a system complexity view with >> dual >> inheritance hierarchies. One argument against is that if a >> metaclass >> does implement methods, in the case of a merge, the metaclass >> methods >> would be mixed up with the "normal" methods (of course you would >> still >> be able to differentiate them within the model). Merging would >> just >> be >> trying to make up one (of the very few) shortcoming(s) of >> Smalltalk's >> design. With respect to shared variables, that's another thing >> that I >> think is a bit overengineered.. >> >> Cheers >> >> Michele >> >> >> On 7-Nov-08, at 8:42 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >> >>>>> As far as I can see, an analysis may depend on whether you >>>>> merge >>>>> classes and metaclasses. >>>>> It seems hard to imagine than any analysis should be depend on >>>>> whether >>>>> there is such a merging. >>>> >>>> you mean independent? >>>> If we have the same data represented the same way independently >>>> of >>>> merging >>>> we favor that an analysis code does have to have different >>>> cases >>>> based >>>> on merging >>>> or not? >>> >>> Maybe there is something I misunderstood. Merging classes and >>> metaclasses when importing means that one single class will >>> represent >>> both the class and its metaclass I guess. >>> This means that there will be twice less classes in a model. A >>> system >>> complexity view on a imported (using merging) smalltalk >>> application >>> will be different than the one with no merging. >>> No? >>> >>> Alexandre >>> >>> >>> -- >>> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >>> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >>> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > > -- > 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 _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev