12 Oct
2010
12 Oct
'10
8:47 p.m.
On 12 oct. 2010, at 20:40, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
Did you take a look at the error?
It's "A set can not contain nil value" and we got nil because #parentPackage
is not initialized
Now the implementation of #allPackages is:
FAMIXPackageGroup withAll: (self entities collectAsSet: [:m | m parentPackage])
I don't want to add a nil check in this method. On the contrary, if one day a nil
appears in this place, I would like an error to pop up so that I can investigate why the
model seems inconsistent.
Most tools
expect things to be something more than some empty entities.
I know this. But I am just wondering whether this is really what we want.
For DSM, I already posted a fix for the test:
model := MooseModel new.
model
add: (FAMIXNamespace new name: 'name1');
add: (FAMIXNamespace new name: 'name2');
add: (FAMIXNamespace new name: 'name3').
allActionMorphs := self allActionMorphsIn: model allNamespaces mooseMenu.
For FamixMethod, #allPackages can not be computed because no package are defined in the
stub model. So just add one.
This looks odd to me. allPackages should return an empty collection, not raises an error.
It is easy to make it work. Getting a good design a bit more tricky :-)
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
Simon
The following raises an error. Is this intended?
| group fClass |
fClass := FAMIXClass new.
group := FAMIXMethodGroup new.
group
add: (FAMIXMethod new name: 'name1'; parentType: fClass);
add: (FAMIXMethod new name: 'name2'; parentType: fClass);
add: (FAMIXMethod new name: 'name3'; parentType: fClass).
group allPackages
allPackages cannot be computed.
On 12 oct. 2010, at 20:04, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
Hi!
Is it okay to assume that some FAMIX object may leave outside a model?
There is the following method:
DSMCell>>configurationForNamespace
self accesses: (self from mooseModel sourceLanguage = #Smalltalk
ifTrue: [ self from outgoingReferencesTo: self to ]
ifFalse:
[ (self from outgoingReferencesTo: self to) union: (self from accessTo: self to) ]).
...
^ self dependencies
What do you think about adding:
self mooseModel ifNil: [ ^ self dependencies ]
It would make the DSM more robust.
I tried to open a DSM on a namespace group defined as:
group := FAMIXNamespaceGroup new.
group
add: (FAMIXNamespace new name: 'name1');
add: (FAMIXNamespace new name: 'name2');
add: (FAMIXNamespace new name: 'name3').
It raises an error.
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
Simon
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev 
12 Oct
12 Oct
8:57 p.m.
New subject: DSMCell>>configurationForNamespace
This looks odd
to me. allPackages should return an empty collection, not raises an error. It is easy to
make it work. Getting a good design a bit more tricky :-)
Did you take a look at the error?
It's "A set can not contain nil value" and we got nil because
#parentPackage is not initialized Now the implementation of #allPackages is:
FAMIXPackageGroup withAll: (self entities collectAsSet: [:m | m parentPackage])
I don't want to add a nil check in this method. On the contrary, if one day a nil
appears in this place, I would like an error to pop up so that I can investigate why the
model seems inconsistent.
I do not have a better implementation to propose. Probably adding a check for nil value is
not the way to go. But again, when I send #allPackages, I expect to have an empty
collection if none are found. Not to raise an error.
I will add a package to make the test happy.
Cheers,
Alexandre
The following raises an error. Is this intended?
| group fClass |
fClass := FAMIXClass new.
group := FAMIXMethodGroup new.
group
add: (FAMIXMethod new name: 'name1'; parentType: fClass);
add: (FAMIXMethod new name: 'name2'; parentType: fClass);
add: (FAMIXMethod new name: 'name3'; parentType: fClass).
group allPackages
allPackages cannot be computed.
On 12 oct. 2010, at 20:04, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
Hi!
Is it okay to assume that some FAMIX object may leave outside a model?
There is the following method:
DSMCell>>configurationForNamespace
self accesses: (self from mooseModel sourceLanguage = #Smalltalk
ifTrue: [ self from outgoingReferencesTo: self to ]
ifFalse:
[ (self from outgoingReferencesTo: self to) union: (self from accessTo: self to) ]).
...
^ self dependencies
What do you think about adding:
self mooseModel ifNil: [ ^ self dependencies ]
It would make the DSM more robust.
I tried to open a DSM on a namespace group defined as:
group := FAMIXNamespaceGroup new.
group
add: (FAMIXNamespace new name: 'name1');
add: (FAMIXNamespace new name: 'name2');
add: (FAMIXNamespace new name: 'name3').
It raises an error.
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
Simon
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
5117
days inactive
5117
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Alexandre Bergel -
Simon Denier