Another MooseChef decision:
aPackage queryOutgoingReferences
returns all the FamixReferences made from aPackage.
this is implemented by taking all methods (self methods) in the package and asking them what reference they make.
And we have FAMIXPackage>>methods ^ self localMethods union: self extensionMethods
So when asking a package what external references it makes, we get references stemming from methods that extend classes of other packages.
We found this while computing a coupling metric for packages.
So the solution would be easy to implement, but we are not sure what is the best solution ?
- we could change FAMIXPackage>>methods (methods belong to the package that owns their class) - we could change queryOutgoingReferences (references/invocation/accesses stem from the methods in the classes in the package, not from the methods in the package) - or we could change our metric
nicolas
it would be good to methodExtens
aPackage methods =
aPackage methodExtensions + aPackage methodDefined?
aClass extendedMethods
have at RPackage because I spent time on the API.
On Jul 31, 2012, at 4:21 PM, Nicolas Anquetil wrote:
Another MooseChef decision:
aPackage queryOutgoingReferences
returns all the FamixReferences made from aPackage.
this is implemented by taking all methods (self methods) in the package and asking them what reference they make.
And we have FAMIXPackage>>methods ^ self localMethods union: self extensionMethods
So when asking a package what external references it makes, we get references stemming from methods that extend classes of other packages.
We found this while computing a coupling metric for packages.
So the solution would be easy to implement, but we are not sure what is the best solution ?
- we could change FAMIXPackage>>methods (methods belong to the package that owns their class)
- we could change queryOutgoingReferences (references/invocation/accesses stem from the methods in the classes in the package, not from the methods in the package)
- or we could change our metric
nicolas _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Hi Nicolas,
The current semantics for both methods and queryOutgoingReferences are quite fine.
As I understand you want to count the amount of references that the code inside a package induces. So, this includes both the extension methods and the defined methods. Why do you see this as a problem?
Cheers, Doru
On 31 Jul 2012, at 16:21, Nicolas Anquetil wrote:
Another MooseChef decision:
aPackage queryOutgoingReferences
returns all the FamixReferences made from aPackage.
this is implemented by taking all methods (self methods) in the package and asking them what reference they make.
And we have FAMIXPackage>>methods ^ self localMethods union: self extensionMethods
So when asking a package what external references it makes, we get references stemming from methods that extend classes of other packages.
We found this while computing a coupling metric for packages.
So the solution would be easy to implement, but we are not sure what is the best solution ?
- we could change FAMIXPackage>>methods (methods belong to the package that owns their class)
- we could change queryOutgoingReferences (references/invocation/accesses stem from the methods in the classes in the package, not from the methods in the package)
- or we could change our metric
nicolas _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Yesterday is a fact. Tomorrow is a possibility. Today is a challenge."
we work on coupling metrics that measure how much a package depends on other packages (can you reuse it without the others).
Even if it is trough a method added by extension, if package A use something in package B, then A needs B (or if you prefer A+C needs B) The current semantic does not show this because the extending method will be part of package C (the one that introduces the extension) and therefore C will depend on B (which seem correct to me), but A will not depend on B ...
So with extensions, we can consider that both A and C depend on B. This is something that the coupling metrics do not consider. So we have to make a choice. For coherence with the same experiment on Java systems, we prefer to say that only A depends on B.
But tis is not how famix and moose chef see things ...
Additionaly, we have a metric whose results are useless in the presence of extensions.
nicolas
On 01/08/12 20:39, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Nicolas,
The current semantics for both methods and queryOutgoingReferences are quite fine.
As I understand you want to count the amount of references that the code inside a package induces. So, this includes both the extension methods and the defined methods. Why do you see this as a problem?
Cheers, Doru
On 31 Jul 2012, at 16:21, Nicolas Anquetil wrote:
Another MooseChef decision:
aPackage queryOutgoingReferences
returns all the FamixReferences made from aPackage.
this is implemented by taking all methods (self methods) in the package and asking them what reference they make.
And we have FAMIXPackage>>methods ^ self localMethods union: self extensionMethods
So when asking a package what external references it makes, we get references stemming from methods that extend classes of other packages.
We found this while computing a coupling metric for packages.
So the solution would be easy to implement, but we are not sure what is the best solution ?
- we could change FAMIXPackage>>methods (methods belong to the package that owns their class)
- we could change queryOutgoingReferences (references/invocation/accesses stem from the methods in the classes in the package, not from the methods in the package)
- or we could change our metric
nicolas _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Yesterday is a fact. Tomorrow is a possibility. Today is a challenge."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Hi,
I still do not understand :).
Let's be more specific. As I understand we could use the following example: - package A = FAMIX-Core - package B = Mondrian - package C = Moose-Finder
The Moose-Finder extends FAMIX entities with visualization methods that depend on Mondrian. This decision was taken exactly so that FAMIX does not depend on Mondrian. So, why would you want to see FAMIX-Core depend on Mondrian?
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Nicolas Anquetil Nicolas.Anquetil@inria.fr wrote:
we work on coupling metrics that measure how much a package depends on other packages (can you reuse it without the others).
Even if it is trough a method added by extension, if package A use something in package B, then A needs B (or if you prefer A+C needs B) The current semantic does not show this because the extending method will be part of package C (the one that introduces the extension) and therefore C will depend on B (which seem correct to me), but A will not depend on B ...
So with extensions, we can consider that both A and C depend on B. This is something that the coupling metrics do not consider. So we have to make a choice. For coherence with the same experiment on Java systems, we prefer to say that only A depends on B.
But tis is not how famix and moose chef see things ...
Additionaly, we have a metric whose results are useless in the presence of extensions.
nicolas
On 01/08/12 20:39, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Nicolas,
The current semantics for both methods and queryOutgoingReferences are quite fine.
As I understand you want to count the amount of references that the code inside a package induces. So, this includes both the extension methods and the defined methods. Why do you see this as a problem?
Cheers, Doru
On 31 Jul 2012, at 16:21, Nicolas Anquetil wrote:
Another MooseChef decision:
aPackage queryOutgoingReferences
returns all the FamixReferences made from aPackage.
this is implemented by taking all methods (self methods) in the package and asking them what reference they make.
And we have FAMIXPackage>>methods ^ self localMethods union: self extensionMethods
So when asking a package what external references it makes, we get references stemming from methods that extend classes of other packages.
We found this while computing a coupling metric for packages.
So the solution would be easy to implement, but we are not sure what is the best solution ?
- we could change FAMIXPackage>>methods (methods belong to the package
that owns their class)
- we could change queryOutgoingReferences (references/invocation/accesses
stem from the methods in the classes in the package, not from the methods in the package)
- or we could change our metric
nicolas _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Yesterday is a fact. Tomorrow is a possibility. Today is a challenge."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
A simple example.
If you create a model with the package Fame-Util, then, inspect such package:
"1" (self classes flatCollectAsSet: [ :each | each queryOutgoingDependencies atPackageScope ]) size " = 7"
"2" (self queryOutgoingDependencies atPackageScope asSet) size " = 12"
What in a first moment is strange. At least when we are implementing metrics.. We would expect the same outgoing references (same size) bor both class level (1) and package level (2). I know that the second one is bigger because it checks all methods, including extensions....but....
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote:
Hi,
I still do not understand :).
Let's be more specific. As I understand we could use the following example:
- package A = FAMIX-Core
- package B = Mondrian
- package C = Moose-Finder
The Moose-Finder extends FAMIX entities with visualization methods that depend on Mondrian. This decision was taken exactly so that FAMIX does not depend on Mondrian. So, why would you want to see FAMIX-Core depend on Mondrian?
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Nicolas Anquetil Nicolas.Anquetil@inria.fr wrote:
we work on coupling metrics that measure how much a package depends on
other
packages (can you reuse it without the others).
Even if it is trough a method added by extension, if package A use
something
in package B, then A needs B (or if you prefer A+C needs B) The current semantic does not show this because the extending method
will be
part of package C (the one that introduces the extension) and therefore C will depend on B (which seem correct to me), but A will not depend on B
...
So with extensions, we can consider that both A and C depend on B. This is something that the coupling metrics do not consider. So we have to make a choice. For coherence with the same experiment on Java systems, we prefer to say that only A depends on B.
But tis is not how famix and moose chef see things ...
Additionaly, we have a metric whose results are useless in the presence
of
extensions.
nicolas
On 01/08/12 20:39, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Nicolas,
The current semantics for both methods and queryOutgoingReferences are quite fine.
As I understand you want to count the amount of references that the code inside a package induces. So, this includes both the extension methods
and
the defined methods. Why do you see this as a problem?
Cheers, Doru
On 31 Jul 2012, at 16:21, Nicolas Anquetil wrote:
Another MooseChef decision:
aPackage queryOutgoingReferences
returns all the FamixReferences made from aPackage.
this is implemented by taking all methods (self methods) in the package and asking them what reference they make.
And we have FAMIXPackage>>methods ^ self localMethods union: self extensionMethods
So when asking a package what external references it makes, we get references stemming from methods that extend classes of other packages.
We found this while computing a coupling metric for packages.
So the solution would be easy to implement, but we are not sure what is the best solution ?
- we could change FAMIXPackage>>methods (methods belong to the package
that owns their class)
- we could change queryOutgoingReferences
(references/invocation/accesses
stem from the methods in the classes in the package, not from the
methods in
the package)
- or we could change our metric
nicolas _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Yesterday is a fact. Tomorrow is a possibility. Today is a challenge."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow" _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Great example. I think it is now clear that your expectations do not match the meaning of FAMIX, at least not when you have a Smalltalk system. Am I right?
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Andre Hora andrehoraa@gmail.com wrote:
A simple example.
If you create a model with the package Fame-Util, then, inspect such package:
"1" (self classes flatCollectAsSet: [ :each | each queryOutgoingDependencies atPackageScope ]) size " = 7"
"2" (self queryOutgoingDependencies atPackageScope asSet) size " = 12"
What in a first moment is strange. At least when we are implementing metrics.. We would expect the same outgoing references (same size) bor both class level (1) and package level (2). I know that the second one is bigger because it checks all methods, including extensions....but....
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote:
Hi,
I still do not understand :).
Let's be more specific. As I understand we could use the following example:
- package A = FAMIX-Core
- package B = Mondrian
- package C = Moose-Finder
The Moose-Finder extends FAMIX entities with visualization methods that depend on Mondrian. This decision was taken exactly so that FAMIX does not depend on Mondrian. So, why would you want to see FAMIX-Core depend on Mondrian?
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Nicolas Anquetil Nicolas.Anquetil@inria.fr wrote:
we work on coupling metrics that measure how much a package depends on other packages (can you reuse it without the others).
Even if it is trough a method added by extension, if package A use something in package B, then A needs B (or if you prefer A+C needs B) The current semantic does not show this because the extending method will be part of package C (the one that introduces the extension) and therefore C will depend on B (which seem correct to me), but A will not depend on B ...
So with extensions, we can consider that both A and C depend on B. This is something that the coupling metrics do not consider. So we have to make a choice. For coherence with the same experiment on Java systems, we prefer to say that only A depends on B.
But tis is not how famix and moose chef see things ...
Additionaly, we have a metric whose results are useless in the presence of extensions.
nicolas
On 01/08/12 20:39, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Nicolas,
The current semantics for both methods and queryOutgoingReferences are quite fine.
As I understand you want to count the amount of references that the code inside a package induces. So, this includes both the extension methods and the defined methods. Why do you see this as a problem?
Cheers, Doru
On 31 Jul 2012, at 16:21, Nicolas Anquetil wrote:
Another MooseChef decision:
aPackage queryOutgoingReferences
returns all the FamixReferences made from aPackage.
this is implemented by taking all methods (self methods) in the package and asking them what reference they make.
And we have FAMIXPackage>>methods ^ self localMethods union: self extensionMethods
So when asking a package what external references it makes, we get references stemming from methods that extend classes of other packages.
We found this while computing a coupling metric for packages.
So the solution would be easy to implement, but we are not sure what is the best solution ?
- we could change FAMIXPackage>>methods (methods belong to the package
that owns their class)
- we could change queryOutgoingReferences
(references/invocation/accesses stem from the methods in the classes in the package, not from the methods in the package)
- or we could change our metric
nicolas _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Yesterday is a fact. Tomorrow is a possibility. Today is a challenge."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow" _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- Andre Hora
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Yes. And that's why I have said "in a first moment", because for this behavior is quite ok for a Smalltalk model. So, I think we need to adapt our metric and not to touch in MooseChef..:)
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote:
Great example. I think it is now clear that your expectations do not match the meaning of FAMIX, at least not when you have a Smalltalk system. Am I right?
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Andre Hora andrehoraa@gmail.com wrote:
A simple example.
If you create a model with the package Fame-Util, then, inspect such package:
"1" (self classes flatCollectAsSet: [ :each | each queryOutgoingDependencies atPackageScope ]) size " = 7"
"2" (self queryOutgoingDependencies atPackageScope asSet) size " = 12"
What in a first moment is strange. At least when we are implementing metrics.. We would expect the same outgoing references (same size) bor both class level (1) and package level (2). I know that the second one is bigger because it checks all methods, including extensions....but....
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com
wrote:
Hi,
I still do not understand :).
Let's be more specific. As I understand we could use the following example:
- package A = FAMIX-Core
- package B = Mondrian
- package C = Moose-Finder
The Moose-Finder extends FAMIX entities with visualization methods that depend on Mondrian. This decision was taken exactly so that FAMIX does not depend on Mondrian. So, why would you want to see FAMIX-Core depend on Mondrian?
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Nicolas Anquetil Nicolas.Anquetil@inria.fr wrote:
we work on coupling metrics that measure how much a package depends on other packages (can you reuse it without the others).
Even if it is trough a method added by extension, if package A use something in package B, then A needs B (or if you prefer A+C needs B) The current semantic does not show this because the extending method will be part of package C (the one that introduces the extension) and
therefore
C will depend on B (which seem correct to me), but A will not depend on
B
...
So with extensions, we can consider that both A and C depend on B. This is something that the coupling metrics do not consider. So we have to make a choice. For coherence with the same experiment on Java systems, we prefer to
say
that only A depends on B.
But tis is not how famix and moose chef see things ...
Additionaly, we have a metric whose results are useless in the
presence
of extensions.
nicolas
On 01/08/12 20:39, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Nicolas,
The current semantics for both methods and queryOutgoingReferences
are
quite fine.
As I understand you want to count the amount of references that the code inside a package induces. So, this includes both the extension
methods
and the defined methods. Why do you see this as a problem?
Cheers, Doru
On 31 Jul 2012, at 16:21, Nicolas Anquetil wrote:
Another MooseChef decision:
aPackage queryOutgoingReferences
returns all the FamixReferences made from aPackage.
this is implemented by taking all methods (self methods) in the package and asking them what reference they make.
And we have FAMIXPackage>>methods ^ self localMethods union: self extensionMethods
So when asking a package what external references it makes, we get references stemming from methods that extend classes of other packages.
We found this while computing a coupling metric for packages.
So the solution would be easy to implement, but we are not sure what is the best solution ?
- we could change FAMIXPackage>>methods (methods belong to the
package
that owns their class)
- we could change queryOutgoingReferences
(references/invocation/accesses stem from the methods in the classes in the package, not from the methods in the package)
- or we could change our metric
nicolas _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Yesterday is a fact. Tomorrow is a possibility. Today is a challenge."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow" _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- Andre Hora
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow" _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-
Andre Hora -
Nicolas Anquetil -
Stéphane Ducasse -
Tudor Girba