13 Jun
2008
13 Jun
'08
8:05 p.m.
debugging with slot is not really cool since we get FMSlot everywhere
instead of the reference to the exact object.
Then I was wondering what is the exact gain: we do not duplicate the
management of what exactly?
Because we are trading coding the management of the relation by space
(the slot objects) and speed
we send value all the times everywhere now.
May be for FAME it is better to generate Slot instead of methods in
the class. But so far I do not know exactly what is the gain.
because I still have to define add/remove.... in the interface of the
class that has a slot.
It seems to me that this is meta programming for the poor. Ideally
Smalltalk would have a nice meta
object protocol and we would define a Slot metaobject and say it in
the class and we would get
the management at runtime or may be at compile time.
Now it looks to me like an overhead without any real gain.
Stef
13 Jun
13 Jun
10:36 p.m.
Now it looks to me like an overhead without any real
gain.
As far as I know from the few hours I helped with the port, the slots
automatically update the opposite relationships. So if you add an
attribute to a class, the attribute will automatically point back to
the owning class. The same same happens if you set the owning class of
an attribute to a different class all the relationships are
automatically updated.
The few times I used the "old" Moose I found it quite annoying and
error prone that I had to manage all these opposite relationships
manually. I think this is a big advantage, if I observed all this
correctly. I might well be wrong ...
Lukas
--
Lukas Renggli
http://www.lukas-renggli.ch
10:51 p.m.
Now it looks
to me like an overhead without any real gain.
As far as I know from the few hours I helped with the port, the slots
automatically update the opposite relationships. So if you add an
attribute to a class, the attribute will automatically point back to
the owning class. The same same happens if you set the owning class of
an attribute to a different class all the relationships are
automatically updated.
The few times I used the "old" Moose I found it quite annoying and
error prone that I had to manage all these opposite relationships
manually. I think this is a big advantage, if I observed all
this
correctly. I might well be wrong ...
You are right but in Famix how many times do you code the FAMIX
metamodel: once every three to five or eight
years.
And what is the cost:
getting a slot and sending values all the time.
Nothing is free.
My biggest concern is that we are using a technology from people that
do not care at all of moose.
So I'm concerned that I will have to understand all the things that
Moose use as infrastructure, because I will maintain
and want build on top of moose.
So Slot are probably cool to generate new metamodel. But we could
generate directly the method
doing the manipulation without having a slot object in our way.
Stef
5819
days inactive
5819
days old
2 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Lukas Renggli -
Stéphane Ducasse