8 Jun
2011
8 Jun
'11
5:16 p.m.
Hi,
On 8 Jun 2011, at 17:07, Usman Bhatti wrote:
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 3:54 PM, Tudor Girba
<tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi,
On 8 Jun 2011, at 15:45, Usman Bhatti wrote:
Pretty much.
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Tudor Girba
<tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi,
On 8 Jun 2011, at 14:21, Simon Denier wrote:
What Simon meant is that in the code there is no Reference to class A. There are only
calls to the constructor A. And a call to a constructor can be considered an indirect
reference. But, the model should only represent what is found in the code.
Is direct reference = static reference?
On 8 juin 2011, at 11:52, Usman Bhatti wrote:
Yes! This is the correct interpretation.
Usman, please do it like suggested by Simon.
So, we keep the duplicates in MSE. Ok I'll change VerveineSharp to implement this
interpretation. But I do not understand what is mean by direct and indirect references
because as I understand the meta-model provides only one type i.e. a Reference class to
instantiate references. How do we do the different between direct and indirect? I am looking to understand what mse entities are
created for associations (except inheritance i.e. invocations, access, refs) in code and
how to exactly treat the duplicates. I have seen a reference of it in a bug reported for
VerveineJ but I am not sure if this issue has been discussed elsewhere.
For example,
A a;
M()
{
a = new A();
a = new A();
a.CallAMethod();
a.CallAMethod();
}
The above code creates these associations (with Verveinesharp) ..
1. An invocations to A's constructor (duplicate constructor invocation is ignored).
2. A field access to the field a (only one instance is recorded, the others are just
ignored).
3. An invocation to CallAMethod (field access is already recorded so this one is not
considered).
4. A reference from method M() to type A (Duplicate reference is ignored).
To me it seems like there are:
- 2 invocations to A constructor
- 2 field accesses to a
- 2 invocations to CallAMethod
There is no direct reference to class A, only indirect references through the
constructor/method calls. Because we can only refer to an object of a class
through a field or through a constructor. Static references refer to the class
directly.Sorry for insisting on that but I want to implement this thing correctly.
Well, this is an unclear territory, so do not feel bad for insisting :). The thing is like
this. If you would manipulate the class as a variable, this would be a reference to that
class. For example:
- if you pass the class as a parameter to a function, or
- if you invoke a static method on a class
Is that better?
Cheers,
Doru
Cheers,
Doru
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Live like you mean it."
Cheers,
Doru
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Don't give to get. Just give."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Please let me know if there an anomaly.
thanx,
Usman
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
Simon Denier
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev