I did not say I don't want to use it
On Mar 7, 2013, at 5:08 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Yes, we do :).
A model without the appropriate behavior has little value. For example, we want to have traversals next to the model. It is for this reason that we should use Traits.Yes
do we? :-)
We do not want to use multiple inheritance as a design tool. We should use Traits instead, as we know it scales better.
We were discussing this over lunch with Damien Cassou (our trait expert)
It seems to me traits are a behaviour reuse mechanism, Famix is mostly about typing and structure.
I do not see why we could not use traits to make fame modular.
I don't think models are just another kind of programming language, they were primarily intended to be conceptual tools that could be derived to programs.
A programming language must be implementable on a computer (or fail to present much interest).
A model must be mostly transformable into a program, but some manual tweaking seems acceptable.
It depends and I do not see the point.
Alain Plantec already did a prototype for having Traits in Fame, but it was not integrated. It would be great if someone would look into this. The only thing to keep in mind is that we would have to also update the Java version of Fame.
Cheers,Doru
-- Nicolas Anquetil -- RMod research team (Inria)