24 Apr
2010
24 Apr
'10
10:22 p.m.
Excellent!
Alexandre
On 24 Apr 2010, at 08:47, Laval Jannik wrote:
Hi,
I made it. Now, there are two ways to build a DSM. First, with the
DSMBuilder, seond by a small script.
Example of the first method:
=====
DSMBuilder buildWithNodes: #(1 2 3 4 5 6) edges: #((1 2) (2 1) (3 1)
(2 3) (4 5) (5 4) (6 4)) from: #first to: #second
=====
Example of the second one:
=====
|DSMAlgo dSMMatrix view|
view := MOViewRenderer new.
dSMMatrix := DSMMatrix withNodes: #(1 2 3 4 5 6) edges: #((1 2) (2
1) (3 1) (2 3) (4 5) (5 4) (6 4)) from:#first to:#second.
DSMVisualization new
open: dSMMatrix
on: view.
view open
=====
Cheers,
Jannik
On Apr 21, 2010, at 16:50 , Simon Denier wrote:
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
On 21 avr. 2010, at 16:19, Tudor Girba wrote:
---
Jannik Laval
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev Hi,
That is great indeed. Jannik, thanks for spending the time to make
it generic. It will be very useful.
I agree with the suggestion of Alex regarding the API. Perhaps you
can build a DSMBuilder that just provides the API to populate your
internal model.
While we are on it, I just want to put forward that the Graph
library already comes with a generic graph builder just for this
purpose (it's used for example in layer table and other places, to
build graph structure with more or less arbitrary classes).
The following is the sample expression to create a basic graph.
MOGraphStructure new
nodeClass: MOGraphNode;
edgeClass: MOGraphEdge;
nodes: #(1 2 3);
edges: #((1 2) (2 1) (3 1)) from: #first to: #second.
Cheers,
Doru
On 21 Apr 2010, at 15:41, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
--
Simon
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev Cool! It works for me.
> dSMMatrix := DSMMatrix withNodes: #(#1 #2 #3) edges: #(#(#1 #2)
> #(#2 #1) #(#3 #1)).
I was wondering why not to use the Mondrian convention for
specifying edges.
In mondrian you can specify edges with:
view edges: nodes from: #selector1 to: #selector2.
For each node contained in nodes, it creates an edge going from
'node selector1' to 'node selector2'. This is quite convenient,
because I do not have to specify how each edge is defined within
the script. The domain I wish to represent is in charge of
defining the edges.
If you still wish to explicitly defining edges, you can always do:
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
view shape rectangle size: 30; withText.
view nodes: (1 to: 3).
view shape arrowedLine.
view edges: {1 -> 2. 2 -> 1 . 3 ->1} from: #key to: #value.
view treeLayout
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Also, maybe it would be nice to have a DSMShape in Mondrian, that
draw a DSM for a particular node (e.g., a group of packages). But
maybe this could be quite some work to adapt your implementation.
Cheers,
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
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev