:)
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:
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@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- 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."