Me, I understood :)
Currently you can not do what you want. Please go ahead and fix this!
It would be nice to have all those "all of kind" selectors like allClasses on both Model and Group instead of Model only. Maybe we can make a common superclass for Group and Model to fix that, if not ... dream of traits and implement it using a state / strategy / delegator pattern.
Also when you are fixing this, please also fix that annoying fact that these "all of kind" selectors have to be meta-described and implemented by hand. It would be much nice if the Model and Group provide automatically an "all of kind" selector for each available MetaDescription.
cheers, AA
On 30 Nov 2007, at 16:01 , Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi,
Hmm. That is an interesting question, but I am not sure about the use case.
At this moment, groups are targeted to modeling behavior for known types of elements. That is if you have a collection of classes we define the behavior in ClassGroup.
On the other hand, a model is made for storage, and for providing a start for navigation.
It seems to me like what you want is to take a model and the filtering result to be another model instead of group. But, I did not understand exactly what the use case is. Could you elaborate some more?
Doru
On Nov 30, 2007, at 2:27 PM, stephane ducasse wrote:
Hi doru
is there a way to convert a model into a group?
Stef _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com www.tudorgirba.com/blog
"Yesterday is a fact. Tomorrow is a possibility. Today is a challenge."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev