7 Mar
2013
7 Mar
'13
5:08 p.m.
Yes, we do :).
A model without the appropriate behavior has little value. For example, we
want to have traversals next to the model. It is for this reason that we
should use Traits.
Cheers,
Doru
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Nicolas Anquetil
<Nicolas.Anquetil(a)inria.fr>wrote;wrote:
On 03/07/2013 02:45 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi,
We do not want to use multiple inheritance as a design tool. We should
use Traits instead, as we know it scales better.
do we? :-)
We were discussing this over lunch with Damien Cassou (our trait expert)
It seems to me traits are a behaviour reuse mechanism, Famix is mostly
about typing and structure.
Maybe conclusions drawn from programming languages implementation do not
apply to models.
I don't think models are just another kind of programming language, they
were primarily intended to be conceptual tools that could be derived to
programs.
A programming language must be implementable on a computer (or fail to
present much interest).
A model must be mostly transformable into a program, but some manual
tweaking seems acceptable.
nicolas
Alain Plantec already did a prototype for having Traits in Fame, but it
was not integrated. It would be great if someone would look into this. The
only thing to keep in mind is that we would have to also update the Java
version of Fame.
Cheers,
Doru
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Nicolas Anquetil <
Nicolas.Anquetil(a)inria.fr> wrote:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
I believe I already said here that I don't like very much the "default"
FAMIX metamodel in Moose because it is the union of Smalltalk and Java
specificities.
For 2 languages it works (more or less), but if we want to add C#, C++,
and whatever-else (not talking about non OO languages), it quickly starts
to be a huge mess.
It would be preferable to have a generic metamodel and specific ones for
each languages.
But then, we will run into cases where we want to have some kind of
multiple inheritance.
For example we could want to say that a Java method and a C function are
behaviouralEntities with return type and Java methods and Smalltalk methods
are behavioural entities with a received (when they are called) and Java
method now have two superclasses.
So the question arise why Fame does not have multiple inheritance?
- no specific reason?
- fundamental design decision?
- historical reason?
nicolas
--
Nicolas Anquetil -- RMod research team (Inria)
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing
listMoose-dev@iam.unibe.chhttps://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
Nicolas Anquetil -- RMod research team (Inria)
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev