1 Feb
2008
1 Feb
'08
9:24 a.m.
:)
Let's take the example again.
A -> B still means that "A superclasses" includes B and that "B
subclasses" includes A.
But, we also have Inh = A -> B as an explicit reification for the
inheritance definition so that "Inh subclass" = A and "Inh superclass"
= B. Inh is an edge with an arrow that starts from A and points to B.
So, A has an outgoing edge and B has an incoming edge. Hence "A
outgoingInheritances" includes Inh, and "B incomingInheritances"
includes Inh.
We will only use these "outgoing/incoming" selectors when we want to
work with dependencies explicitly. For most use cases we only work
with "subclasses" and "superclasses" of the classes.
How is it now?
Doru
On Feb 1, 2008, at 8:41 AM, Oscar Nierstrasz wrote:
On Feb 1, 2008, at 8:38, Tudor Girba wrote:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.tudorgirba.com/blog
"Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting
is the right one."
We already have incoming/outgoing invocations,
and incoming accesses.
So, for naming consistency we thought of outgoing inheritances.
That makes no sense to me!
In all
these cases, the client has outgoing arrows and the client has
incoming arrows.
Say what?
- on
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev