Hi, I developed a small extension which allows to query a moose model to obtain a set of implicit associations derived from low level relationships. What you can do concretely is for example to select a group of namespace entities, and ask for all implicit associations existing between the selected entities based on a specific relationship existing at a lower abstraction level (i.e.: the method level). The end result is much similar to the one provided by Moose Chef, with the advantage of being much more generic and flexible. Each generated association keeps a reference to the concrete relationships on which it is based on. If you are interested, you can try it out at: http://www.squeaksource.com/Lift.html The wiki page contains some usage examples. cheers, Andrea _____________________________ Andrea Caracciolo -- caracciolo(a)iam.unibe.ch Software Composition Group University of Bern _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev

Lift was initially born to materialize implicit relationships derived from low level associations. Moose chef is a query engine for famix models. This means that it analyses a given model and returns only concrete associations. What i understand from your comments is that you would like to port some of the querying functionalities offered by chef to lift. I tried to make up a list of possible requirements: - query concrete associations by applying a selector on an entity/group # in chef: aMethod queryAllIncomingInvocations - query concrete associations by applying a selector on entities contained in the receiver entity/group # in chef: aNamespace queryAllIncomingInvocations - query inferred associations by applying a selector on entities contained in the receiver entity/group # in chef: not supported - filter returned associations by applying a custom select block - filter returned associations by source/target class type - filter returned associations by target scope (e.g: target entity must be within anEntity/aGroup) # in chef: aMethod queryOutgoingReferences opposites withinPackage: aPackage - transform returned associations by applying a custom collect block - transform each returned association to its source/target entity # in chef: aMethod queryAllIncomingInvocations opposites - return entities of a specified class type containing the "to" part of the returned associations # in chef: aMethod queryOutgoingReferences atPackageScope Are they correct ? is the list complete ? It's already like this. concrete low level associations are usually (when possible) taken as is. If you execute: (self lift: #incomingInvocations from:self mooseModel allMethods) asMooseGroup. You will see that the subassociations are of type FAMIXInvocation. You are right. My supposition is that all the associations are one-to-one. FAMIXAssociation has a "from" and a "to" field. How would you handle one-to-many associations ? If you pass the selector to the specified receiver and you get multiple entities would you treat it as a one-to-many association ? "to" and "from", as fabrizio said, do not have any predefined semantic. They just follow the direction of the selector (from is the message reciever and to is the result). I will soon add support for mooseEntities too. Cheers, Andrea On Jun 20, 2012, at 9:57 AM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > On Jun 19, 2012, at 7:30 PM, Fabrizio Perin wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> 2012/6/19 Nicolas Anquetil<Nicolas.Anquetil(a)inria.fr> >> On 19/06/12 17:10, Andrea Caracciolo wrote: >> Yes. >> However take care that you are implicitly restricting your relationships to be binary and directed (from/to) >> What if I want a "sibling" relationship? >> >> Sorry Nicolas but I don't follow you. All the relations in Moose are binary: any relation is just among two entities. If I have a one to many relation than I will have multiple relation objects with the same sender and different receivers. Also the lift relation it is not necessarily directed. It is the rationale that makes it directed or not. From and to don't have to mean that the relation goes from the from part and goes to the to part. An attribute that specify if the lift relation is directed or not could be useful to distinguish the case. > Hi fabrizio > Multiple inheritance is managed as different relationships? I do not remember :) > >> It might be implemented in a way that contradict your hypotheses. >> >> The roles might have different names than to/from and it could be interesting (or not) to take this into account just as you have "lift: aSelector" >> This could mean that instead of returning a collection of FAMIXLiftedAssociation, you would return a LiftedResult that would contain a collection of "normal relationships" (whatever they are). >> >> quite impossible to return normal relations since Lift infers and returns relations that do not exist. > ? > > >> The rest of your email about helper methods to return directly the models could make sense in some cases. >> >>> >> A query to a moosegroup of one entity is it not the same? >> >> Cheers, >> Fabrizio >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev