wrote:

+ a reference from method M() to class A

nicolas ------------------------------ *De: *"Usman Bhatti" <usman.bhatti(a)gmail.com> *À: *"Moose-related development" <moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch> *Envoyé: *Mercredi 8 Juin 2011 11:52:21 *Objet: *[Moose-dev] MSE: Dealing with Associations 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). 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 _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev

On 8 juin 2011, at 11:52, Usman Bhatti wrote: 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.

-- Simon Denier _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev

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: 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?

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

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: 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?

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.

Cheers, Doru -- 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

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: Hi, On 8 Jun 2011, at 17:07, Usman Bhatti wrote: Pretty much. 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 just a final clarification (I hope :-) m (A a) { //do square brackets provide correct interpretation? a.CallAmethod(); [not a reference, access and invocation only]

A b = new A();

a = b; [reference to A + 2 accesses to A]

}

- if you invoke a static method on a class Is that better? Yep, much better :-).. thanx Cheers, Doru -- www.tudorgirba.com "Live like you mean it." _______________________________________________ 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

No. There is no reference to A, only an access to a and an access to b. Ok. Now I understand. Merely, passing a type as a parameter creates a reference. It is not important how that parameter is used in the method.

Indeed, simply declaring the type of a parameter is not a reference. However, passing a class as an argument to a method call is. That is a good point.