Hi Usman,
I saw that you added the port code to the MooseAlgos repo. Thanks.
Now, during your changes, you inherited the Lattice and the Node from MONode.
This caused Moose to be unloadable and it is wrong from two points of view: 1. MONode is not meant to be inherited at all. You are supposed to use Mondrian as a transformation from your domain into the internal Mondrian model. 2. MooseAlgos is a basic set of algorithms with no dependencies. Mondrian is higher level. Thus, MooseAlgos cannot depend on Mondrian.
For these reasons, I now removed the inheritance from MONode.
Furthermore, we also need tests for FCA.
Cheers, Doru
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef."
nice arquitectural rule. could be enforced automatically?
nicolas
----- Mail original -----
De: "Tudor Girba" tudor@tudorgirba.com À: "Moose-dev Moose Dev" moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch Envoyé: Mercredi 19 Octobre 2011 21:23:09 Objet: [Moose-dev] fca should not depend on mondrian Hi Usman,
I saw that you added the port code to the MooseAlgos repo. Thanks.
Now, during your changes, you inherited the Lattice and the Node from MONode.
This caused Moose to be unloadable and it is wrong from two points of view:
- MONode is not meant to be inherited at all. You are supposed to use
Mondrian as a transformation from your domain into the internal Mondrian model. 2. MooseAlgos is a basic set of algorithms with no dependencies. Mondrian is higher level. Thus, MooseAlgos cannot depend on Mondrian.
For these reasons, I now removed the inheritance from MONode.
Furthermore, we also need tests for FCA.
Cheers, Doru
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Yes. Ideally we should derive these from the Metacello description.
I hope this will happen after I sit down with Dale at Smalltalks.
Doru
On 19 Oct 2011, at 21:42, Nicolas Anquetil wrote:
nice arquitectural rule. could be enforced automatically?
nicolas
----- Mail original -----
De: "Tudor Girba" tudor@tudorgirba.com À: "Moose-dev Moose Dev" moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch Envoyé: Mercredi 19 Octobre 2011 21:23:09 Objet: [Moose-dev] fca should not depend on mondrian Hi Usman,
I saw that you added the port code to the MooseAlgos repo. Thanks.
Now, during your changes, you inherited the Lattice and the Node from MONode.
This caused Moose to be unloadable and it is wrong from two points of view:
- MONode is not meant to be inherited at all. You are supposed to use
Mondrian as a transformation from your domain into the internal Mondrian model. 2. MooseAlgos is a basic set of algorithms with no dependencies. Mondrian is higher level. Thus, MooseAlgos cannot depend on Mondrian.
For these reasons, I now removed the inheritance from MONode.
Furthermore, we also need tests for FCA.
Cheers, Doru
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef."
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
"Presenting is storytelling."
Hi Usman,
Please read this email. You just committed another version that broke the build :)
I fixed it again.
Cheers, Doru
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com Subject: fca should not depend on mondrian Date: 19 October 2011 21:23:09 CEST To: Moose-dev Moose Dev moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch
Hi Usman,
I saw that you added the port code to the MooseAlgos repo. Thanks.
Now, during your changes, you inherited the Lattice and the Node from MONode.
This caused Moose to be unloadable and it is wrong from two points of view:
- MONode is not meant to be inherited at all. You are supposed to use Mondrian as a transformation from your domain into the internal Mondrian model.
- MooseAlgos is a basic set of algorithms with no dependencies. Mondrian is higher level. Thus, MooseAlgos cannot depend on Mondrian.
For these reasons, I now removed the inheritance from MONode.
Furthermore, we also need tests for FCA.
Cheers, Doru
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"One cannot do more than one can do."
I looked a bit more. The code from Lattice and LatticeNode depends on the logic of Mondrian. This should best be replaced with code that exists in Moose-Algos-Graph.
In the meantime I also created the Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis package and added it to the configuration.
Cheers, Doru
On 19 Oct 2011, at 22:36, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Usman,
Please read this email. You just committed another version that broke the build :)
I fixed it again.
Cheers, Doru
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com Subject: fca should not depend on mondrian Date: 19 October 2011 21:23:09 CEST To: Moose-dev Moose Dev moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch
Hi Usman,
I saw that you added the port code to the MooseAlgos repo. Thanks.
Now, during your changes, you inherited the Lattice and the Node from MONode.
This caused Moose to be unloadable and it is wrong from two points of view:
- MONode is not meant to be inherited at all. You are supposed to use Mondrian as a transformation from your domain into the internal Mondrian model.
- MooseAlgos is a basic set of algorithms with no dependencies. Mondrian is higher level. Thus, MooseAlgos cannot depend on Mondrian.
For these reasons, I now removed the inheritance from MONode.
Furthermore, we also need tests for FCA.
Cheers, Doru
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"One cannot do more than one can do."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Some battles are better lost than fought."
Hello Doru,
While porting the VW version of the lattice construction algos, the most adequate representation for VW data structures was provided by Mondrian so I used it. Now, I'll place them in Moose-Algos-Graph... Ok for the tests. I'll start creating them now. I'll commit another version in the evening.
thanx Usman
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote:
I looked a bit more. The code from Lattice and LatticeNode depends on the logic of Mondrian. This should best be replaced with code that exists in Moose-Algos-Graph.
In the meantime I also created the Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis package and added it to the configuration.
Cheers, Doru
On 19 Oct 2011, at 22:36, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Usman,
Please read this email. You just committed another version that broke the
build :)
I fixed it again.
Cheers, Doru
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com Subject: fca should not depend on mondrian Date: 19 October 2011 21:23:09 CEST To: Moose-dev Moose Dev moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch
Hi Usman,
I saw that you added the port code to the MooseAlgos repo. Thanks.
Now, during your changes, you inherited the Lattice and the Node from
MONode.
This caused Moose to be unloadable and it is wrong from two points of
view:
- MONode is not meant to be inherited at all. You are supposed to use
Mondrian as a transformation from your domain into the internal Mondrian model.
- MooseAlgos is a basic set of algorithms with no dependencies.
Mondrian is higher level. Thus, MooseAlgos cannot depend on Mondrian.
For these reasons, I now removed the inheritance from MONode.
Furthermore, we also need tests for FCA.
Cheers, Doru
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"One cannot do more than one can do."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Some battles are better lost than fought."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.comwrote:
Hello Doru,
While porting the VW version of the lattice construction algos, the most adequate representation for VW data structures was provided by Mondrian so I used it.
Mistakes happen. But, it is important to learn from them :)
Now, I'll place them in Moose-Algos-Graph...
I am not sure what you mean. I did not mean that you should move the Lattice classes in Moose-Algos-Graph. The Graphs should not depend on FormalConceptAnalysis. I was just saying that the Lattice is merely a support for creating a graph out of the FCA algorithm. In the VW version, it was also a visual class, but it does not have to be. It should only contain the logic of building the graph. Maybe for this purpose you can use the Graph concepts. The display can be later build using a Mondrian script.
Ok for the tests. I'll start creating them now.
Please put them in the newly created package (Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis).
Doru
I'll commit another version in the evening.
thanx Usman
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.comwrote:
I looked a bit more. The code from Lattice and LatticeNode depends on the logic of Mondrian. This should best be replaced with code that exists in Moose-Algos-Graph.
In the meantime I also created the Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis package and added it to the configuration.
Cheers, Doru
On 19 Oct 2011, at 22:36, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Usman,
Please read this email. You just committed another version that broke
the build :)
I fixed it again.
Cheers, Doru
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com Subject: fca should not depend on mondrian Date: 19 October 2011 21:23:09 CEST To: Moose-dev Moose Dev moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch
Hi Usman,
I saw that you added the port code to the MooseAlgos repo. Thanks.
Now, during your changes, you inherited the Lattice and the Node from
MONode.
This caused Moose to be unloadable and it is wrong from two points of
view:
- MONode is not meant to be inherited at all. You are supposed to use
Mondrian as a transformation from your domain into the internal Mondrian model.
- MooseAlgos is a basic set of algorithms with no dependencies.
Mondrian is higher level. Thus, MooseAlgos cannot depend on Mondrian.
For these reasons, I now removed the inheritance from MONode.
Furthermore, we also need tests for FCA.
Cheers, Doru
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"One cannot do more than one can do."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Some battles are better lost than fought."
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
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.comwrote:
Hello Doru,
While porting the VW version of the lattice construction algos, the most adequate representation for VW data structures was provided by Mondrian so I used it.
Mistakes happen. But, it is important to learn from them :)
Now, I'll place them in Moose-Algos-Graph...
I am not sure what you mean. I did not mean that you should move the Lattice classes in Moose-Algos-Graph. The Graphs should not depend on FormalConceptAnalysis. I was just saying that the Lattice is merely a support for creating a graph out of the FCA algorithm. In the VW version, it was also a visual class, but it does not have to be. It should only contain the logic of building the graph. Maybe for this purpose you can use the Graph concepts. The display can be later build using a Mondrian script.
Ok, so I can break lattice drawing into two parts: construction + display. The display part can be moved to mondrian as an extension of FCA. So, that will break the dependency of FCA with Mondrian.
The lattice construction algo can be moved into Moose-Algos-Graph: Moose-Algos-Graph classes can be used to construct lattices instead of MONode. Now, lattice construction is not a simple graph construction and we need knowledge of concepts to construct a lattice. So, lattice construction would always depend on the concepts and then there is a dependency with the package FormalConceptAnalysis. I do not see a way that the lattice construction can work independent of FormalConceptAnalysis. Can you suggest a possible workaround for this?
Ok for the tests. I'll start creating them now.
Please put them in the newly created package (Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis).
Doru
I'll commit another version in the evening.
thanx Usman
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.comwrote:
I looked a bit more. The code from Lattice and LatticeNode depends on the logic of Mondrian. This should best be replaced with code that exists in Moose-Algos-Graph.
In the meantime I also created the Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis package and added it to the configuration.
Cheers, Doru
On 19 Oct 2011, at 22:36, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Usman,
Please read this email. You just committed another version that broke
the build :)
I fixed it again.
Cheers, Doru
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com Subject: fca should not depend on mondrian Date: 19 October 2011 21:23:09 CEST To: Moose-dev Moose Dev moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch
Hi Usman,
I saw that you added the port code to the MooseAlgos repo. Thanks.
Now, during your changes, you inherited the Lattice and the Node from
MONode.
This caused Moose to be unloadable and it is wrong from two points of
view:
- MONode is not meant to be inherited at all. You are supposed to use
Mondrian as a transformation from your domain into the internal Mondrian model.
- MooseAlgos is a basic set of algorithms with no dependencies.
Mondrian is higher level. Thus, MooseAlgos cannot depend on Mondrian.
For these reasons, I now removed the inheritance from MONode.
Furthermore, we also need tests for FCA.
Cheers, Doru
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"One cannot do more than one can do."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Some battles are better lost than fought."
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
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.comwrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.comwrote:
Hello Doru,
While porting the VW version of the lattice construction algos, the most adequate representation for VW data structures was provided by Mondrian so I used it.
Mistakes happen. But, it is important to learn from them :)
Now, I'll place them in Moose-Algos-Graph...
I am not sure what you mean. I did not mean that you should move the Lattice classes in Moose-Algos-Graph. The Graphs should not depend on FormalConceptAnalysis. I was just saying that the Lattice is merely a support for creating a graph out of the FCA algorithm. In the VW version, it was also a visual class, but it does not have to be. It should only contain the logic of building the graph. Maybe for this purpose you can use the Graph concepts. The display can be later build using a Mondrian script.
Ok, so I can break lattice drawing into two parts: construction + display.
Yes.
The display part can be moved to mondrian as an extension of FCA. So, that will break the dependency of FCA with Mondrian.
No. Like I mentioned before, the display should be moved to Moose-MondrianPaintings. Mondrian is generic, and FCA is generic. They should not know about each other.
The lattice construction algo can be moved into Moose-Algos-Graph: Moose-Algos-Graph classes can be used to construct lattices instead of MONode. Now, lattice construction is not a simple graph construction and we need knowledge of concepts to construct a lattice. So, lattice construction would always depend on the concepts and then there is a dependency with the package FormalConceptAnalysis. I do not see a way that the lattice construction can work independent of FormalConceptAnalysis. Can you suggest a possible workaround for this?
I did not say that it the construction should be independent. I simply said that if needed you might benefit from the graph support. In any case, the lattice will depend on FCA. So, either you place the Lattice class in the FCA package, or we create another package that will depend on FCA and possibly the graph one. The lattice does certainly not belong in the Graph package.
Doru
Ok for the tests. I'll start creating them now.
Please put them in the newly created package (Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis).
Doru
I'll commit another version in the evening.
thanx Usman
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.comwrote:
I looked a bit more. The code from Lattice and LatticeNode depends on the logic of Mondrian. This should best be replaced with code that exists in Moose-Algos-Graph.
In the meantime I also created the Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis package and added it to the configuration.
Cheers, Doru
On 19 Oct 2011, at 22:36, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Usman,
Please read this email. You just committed another version that broke
the build :)
I fixed it again.
Cheers, Doru
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com Subject: fca should not depend on mondrian Date: 19 October 2011 21:23:09 CEST To: Moose-dev Moose Dev moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch
Hi Usman,
I saw that you added the port code to the MooseAlgos repo. Thanks.
Now, during your changes, you inherited the Lattice and the Node from
MONode.
This caused Moose to be unloadable and it is wrong from two points of
view:
- MONode is not meant to be inherited at all. You are supposed to
use Mondrian as a transformation from your domain into the internal Mondrian model.
- MooseAlgos is a basic set of algorithms with no dependencies.
Mondrian is higher level. Thus, MooseAlgos cannot depend on Mondrian.
For these reasons, I now removed the inheritance from MONode.
Furthermore, we also need tests for FCA.
Cheers, Doru
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"One cannot do more than one can do."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Some battles are better lost than fought."
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
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.comwrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.comwrote:
Hello Doru,
While porting the VW version of the lattice construction algos, the most adequate representation for VW data structures was provided by Mondrian so I used it.
Mistakes happen. But, it is important to learn from them :)
Now, I'll place them in Moose-Algos-Graph...
I am not sure what you mean. I did not mean that you should move the Lattice classes in Moose-Algos-Graph. The Graphs should not depend on FormalConceptAnalysis. I was just saying that the Lattice is merely a support for creating a graph out of the FCA algorithm. In the VW version, it was also a visual class, but it does not have to be. It should only contain the logic of building the graph. Maybe for this purpose you can use the Graph concepts. The display can be later build using a Mondrian script.
Ok, so I can break lattice drawing into two parts: construction + display.
Yes.
The display part can be moved to mondrian as an extension of FCA. So, that will break the dependency of FCA with Mondrian.
No. Like I mentioned before, the display should be moved to Moose-MondrianPaintings. Mondrian is generic, and FCA is generic. They should not know about each other.
Ok. That's a good place for lattice display. Is it normal that I have Moose-MondrianPaintings-* but there is no Moose-MondrianPaintings package in my image?
The lattice construction algo can be moved into Moose-Algos-Graph: Moose-Algos-Graph classes can be used to construct lattices instead of MONode. Now, lattice construction is not a simple graph construction and we need knowledge of concepts to construct a lattice. So, lattice construction would always depend on the concepts and then there is a dependency with the package FormalConceptAnalysis. I do not see a way that the lattice construction can work independent of FormalConceptAnalysis. Can you suggest a possible workaround for this?
I did not say that it the construction should be independent. I simply said that if needed you might benefit from the graph support. In any case, the lattice will depend on FCA. So, either you place the Lattice class in the FCA package, or we create another package that will depend on FCA and possibly the graph one. The lattice does certainly not belong in the Graph package.
Ok I want to use MalGraphAlgorithm and MalGraphNode as superclasses for Lattice and LatticeNode respectively, from Moose-Algos-Graph package. Now, I think creating a third package would be a better option because that would avoid the dependency: FormalConceptAnalysis <-> Moose-Algos-Graph. Should I create a package Moose-Algos-Graph-Lattice or Moose-Algos-Lattice?
Doru
Ok for the tests. I'll start creating them now.
Please put them in the newly created package (Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis).
Doru
I'll commit another version in the evening.
thanx Usman
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.comwrote:
I looked a bit more. The code from Lattice and LatticeNode depends on the logic of Mondrian. This should best be replaced with code that exists in Moose-Algos-Graph.
In the meantime I also created the Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis package and added it to the configuration.
Cheers, Doru
On 19 Oct 2011, at 22:36, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Usman,
Please read this email. You just committed another version that broke
the build :)
I fixed it again.
Cheers, Doru
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com > Subject: fca should not depend on mondrian > Date: 19 October 2011 21:23:09 CEST > To: Moose-dev Moose Dev moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch > > Hi Usman, > > I saw that you added the port code to the MooseAlgos repo. Thanks. > > Now, during your changes, you inherited the Lattice and the Node
from MONode.
> > This caused Moose to be unloadable and it is wrong from two points
of view:
> 1. MONode is not meant to be inherited at all. You are supposed to
use Mondrian as a transformation from your domain into the internal Mondrian model.
> 2. MooseAlgos is a basic set of algorithms with no dependencies.
Mondrian is higher level. Thus, MooseAlgos cannot depend on Mondrian.
> > For these reasons, I now removed the inheritance from MONode. > > Furthermore, we also need tests for FCA. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef." > > > > > >
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"One cannot do more than one can do."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Some battles are better lost than fought."
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
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
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.comwrote:
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.comwrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.comwrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.comwrote:
Hello Doru,
While porting the VW version of the lattice construction algos, the most adequate representation for VW data structures was provided by Mondrian so I used it.
Mistakes happen. But, it is important to learn from them :)
Now, I'll place them in Moose-Algos-Graph...
I am not sure what you mean. I did not mean that you should move the Lattice classes in Moose-Algos-Graph. The Graphs should not depend on FormalConceptAnalysis. I was just saying that the Lattice is merely a support for creating a graph out of the FCA algorithm. In the VW version, it was also a visual class, but it does not have to be. It should only contain the logic of building the graph. Maybe for this purpose you can use the Graph concepts. The display can be later build using a Mondrian script.
Ok, so I can break lattice drawing into two parts: construction + display.
Yes.
The display part can be moved to mondrian as an extension of FCA. So, that will break the dependency of FCA with Mondrian.
No. Like I mentioned before, the display should be moved to Moose-MondrianPaintings. Mondrian is generic, and FCA is generic. They should not know about each other.
Ok. That's a good place for lattice display. Is it normal that I have Moose-MondrianPaintings-* but there is no Moose-MondrianPaintings package in my image?
At the moment, it is acceptable, but in the near future it won't be :).
The lattice construction algo can be moved into Moose-Algos-Graph: Moose-Algos-Graph classes can be used to construct lattices instead of MONode. Now, lattice construction is not a simple graph construction and we need knowledge of concepts to construct a lattice. So, lattice construction would always depend on the concepts and then there is a dependency with the package FormalConceptAnalysis. I do not see a way that the lattice construction can work independent of FormalConceptAnalysis. Can you suggest a possible workaround for this?
I did not say that it the construction should be independent. I simply said that if needed you might benefit from the graph support. In any case, the lattice will depend on FCA. So, either you place the Lattice class in the FCA package, or we create another package that will depend on FCA and possibly the graph one. The lattice does certainly not belong in the Graph package.
Ok I want to use MalGraphAlgorithm and MalGraphNode as superclasses for Lattice and LatticeNode respectively, from Moose-Algos-Graph package.
Exactly.
Now, I think creating a third package would be a better option because that would avoid the dependency: FormalConceptAnalysis <-> Moose-Algos-Graph.
Yes.
Should I create a package Moose-Algos-Graph-Lattice or Moose-Algos-Lattice?
Please name it Moose-Algos-Lattice.
If you name it Moose-Algos-Graph-Lattice, then Monticello will think it is a subcategory of Moose-Algos-Graph, due to implicit naming conventions. Actually, it is this implicit mechanism that makes it possible to have multiple Moose-MondrianPaintings-* categories and only one package. However, in Moose we want to keep as much as possible the 1-to-1 mapping between categories and packages.
Cheers, Doru
Doru
Ok for the tests. I'll start creating them now.
Please put them in the newly created package (Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis).
Doru
I'll commit another version in the evening.
thanx Usman
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.comwrote:
I looked a bit more. The code from Lattice and LatticeNode depends on the logic of Mondrian. This should best be replaced with code that exists in Moose-Algos-Graph.
In the meantime I also created the Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis package and added it to the configuration.
Cheers, Doru
On 19 Oct 2011, at 22:36, Tudor Girba wrote:
> Hi Usman, > > Please read this email. You just committed another version that broke the build :) > > I fixed it again. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com >> Subject: fca should not depend on mondrian >> Date: 19 October 2011 21:23:09 CEST >> To: Moose-dev Moose Dev moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch >> >> Hi Usman, >> >> I saw that you added the port code to the MooseAlgos repo. Thanks. >> >> Now, during your changes, you inherited the Lattice and the Node from MONode. >> >> This caused Moose to be unloadable and it is wrong from two points of view: >> 1. MONode is not meant to be inherited at all. You are supposed to use Mondrian as a transformation from your domain into the internal Mondrian model. >> 2. MooseAlgos is a basic set of algorithms with no dependencies. Mondrian is higher level. Thus, MooseAlgos cannot depend on Mondrian. >> >> For these reasons, I now removed the inheritance from MONode. >> >> Furthermore, we also need tests for FCA. >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef." >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "One cannot do more than one can do." > > >
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Some battles are better lost than fought."
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
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
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Doru,
Can you remove the package: Moose-Algo-Lattice Its an empty package that was created because of my mistake that i missed 's' in algos. thanx
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.comwrote:
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.comwrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.comwrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Usman Bhatti <usman.bhatti@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello Doru,
While porting the VW version of the lattice construction algos, the most adequate representation for VW data structures was provided by Mondrian so I used it.
Mistakes happen. But, it is important to learn from them :)
Now, I'll place them in Moose-Algos-Graph...
I am not sure what you mean. I did not mean that you should move the Lattice classes in Moose-Algos-Graph. The Graphs should not depend on FormalConceptAnalysis. I was just saying that the Lattice is merely a support for creating a graph out of the FCA algorithm. In the VW version, it was also a visual class, but it does not have to be. It should only contain the logic of building the graph. Maybe for this purpose you can use the Graph concepts. The display can be later build using a Mondrian script.
Ok, so I can break lattice drawing into two parts: construction + display.
Yes.
The display part can be moved to mondrian as an extension of FCA. So, that will break the dependency of FCA with Mondrian.
No. Like I mentioned before, the display should be moved to Moose-MondrianPaintings. Mondrian is generic, and FCA is generic. They should not know about each other.
Ok. That's a good place for lattice display. Is it normal that I have Moose-MondrianPaintings-* but there is no Moose-MondrianPaintings package in my image?
At the moment, it is acceptable, but in the near future it won't be :).
The lattice construction algo can be moved into Moose-Algos-Graph: Moose-Algos-Graph classes can be used to construct lattices instead of MONode. Now, lattice construction is not a simple graph construction and we need knowledge of concepts to construct a lattice. So, lattice construction would always depend on the concepts and then there is a dependency with the package FormalConceptAnalysis. I do not see a way that the lattice construction can work independent of FormalConceptAnalysis. Can you suggest a possible workaround for this?
I did not say that it the construction should be independent. I simply said that if needed you might benefit from the graph support. In any case, the lattice will depend on FCA. So, either you place the Lattice class in the FCA package, or we create another package that will depend on FCA and possibly the graph one. The lattice does certainly not belong in the Graph package.
Ok I want to use MalGraphAlgorithm and MalGraphNode as superclasses for Lattice and LatticeNode respectively, from Moose-Algos-Graph package.
Exactly.
Now, I think creating a third package would be a better option because that would avoid the dependency: FormalConceptAnalysis <-> Moose-Algos-Graph.
Yes.
Should I create a package Moose-Algos-Graph-Lattice or Moose-Algos-Lattice?
Please name it Moose-Algos-Lattice.
If you name it Moose-Algos-Graph-Lattice, then Monticello will think it is a subcategory of Moose-Algos-Graph, due to implicit naming conventions. Actually, it is this implicit mechanism that makes it possible to have multiple Moose-MondrianPaintings-* categories and only one package. However, in Moose we want to keep as much as possible the 1-to-1 mapping between categories and packages.
Cheers, Doru
Doru
Ok for the tests. I'll start creating them now.
Please put them in the newly created package (Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis).
Doru
I'll commit another version in the evening.
thanx Usman
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.comwrote:
> I looked a bit more. The code from Lattice and LatticeNode depends on > the logic of Mondrian. This should best be replaced with code that exists in > Moose-Algos-Graph. > > In the meantime I also created the > Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis package and added it to the > configuration. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > On 19 Oct 2011, at 22:36, Tudor Girba wrote: > > > Hi Usman, > > > > Please read this email. You just committed another version that > broke the build :) > > > > I fixed it again. > > > > Cheers, > > Doru > > > > > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > >> From: Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com > >> Subject: fca should not depend on mondrian > >> Date: 19 October 2011 21:23:09 CEST > >> To: Moose-dev Moose Dev moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch > >> > >> Hi Usman, > >> > >> I saw that you added the port code to the MooseAlgos repo. Thanks. > >> > >> Now, during your changes, you inherited the Lattice and the Node > from MONode. > >> > >> This caused Moose to be unloadable and it is wrong from two points > of view: > >> 1. MONode is not meant to be inherited at all. You are supposed to > use Mondrian as a transformation from your domain into the internal Mondrian > model. > >> 2. MooseAlgos is a basic set of algorithms with no dependencies. > Mondrian is higher level. Thus, MooseAlgos cannot depend on Mondrian. > >> > >> For these reasons, I now removed the inheritance from MONode. > >> > >> Furthermore, we also need tests for FCA. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Doru > >> > >> > >> -- > >> www.tudorgirba.com > >> > >> "No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef." > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > www.tudorgirba.com > > > > "One cannot do more than one can do." > > > > > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Some battles are better lost than fought." > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
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
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
I will try after squeaksource gets back online :)
Doru
On 21 Oct 2011, at 18:58, Usman Bhatti wrote:
Doru,
Can you remove the package: Moose-Algo-Lattice
Its an empty package that was created because of my mistake that i missed 's' in algos. thanx
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote: Hi,
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote: Hi,
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote: Hi,
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Usman Bhatti usman.bhatti@gmail.com wrote: Hello Doru,
While porting the VW version of the lattice construction algos, the most adequate representation for VW data structures was provided by Mondrian so I used it.
Mistakes happen. But, it is important to learn from them :)
Now, I'll place them in Moose-Algos-Graph...
I am not sure what you mean. I did not mean that you should move the Lattice classes in Moose-Algos-Graph. The Graphs should not depend on FormalConceptAnalysis. I was just saying that the Lattice is merely a support for creating a graph out of the FCA algorithm. In the VW version, it was also a visual class, but it does not have to be. It should only contain the logic of building the graph. Maybe for this purpose you can use the Graph concepts. The display can be later build using a Mondrian script.
Ok, so I can break lattice drawing into two parts: construction + display.
Yes.
The display part can be moved to mondrian as an extension of FCA. So, that will break the dependency of FCA with Mondrian.
No. Like I mentioned before, the display should be moved to Moose-MondrianPaintings. Mondrian is generic, and FCA is generic. They should not know about each other.
Ok. That's a good place for lattice display. Is it normal that I have Moose-MondrianPaintings-* but there is no Moose-MondrianPaintings package in my image?
At the moment, it is acceptable, but in the near future it won't be :).
The lattice construction algo can be moved into Moose-Algos-Graph: Moose-Algos-Graph classes can be used to construct lattices instead of MONode. Now, lattice construction is not a simple graph construction and we need knowledge of concepts to construct a lattice. So, lattice construction would always depend on the concepts and then there is a dependency with the package FormalConceptAnalysis. I do not see a way that the lattice construction can work independent of FormalConceptAnalysis. Can you suggest a possible workaround for this?
I did not say that it the construction should be independent. I simply said that if needed you might benefit from the graph support. In any case, the lattice will depend on FCA. So, either you place the Lattice class in the FCA package, or we create another package that will depend on FCA and possibly the graph one. The lattice does certainly not belong in the Graph package.
Ok I want to use MalGraphAlgorithm and MalGraphNode as superclasses for Lattice and LatticeNode respectively, from Moose-Algos-Graph package.
Exactly.
Now, I think creating a third package would be a better option because that would avoid the dependency: FormalConceptAnalysis <-> Moose-Algos-Graph.
Yes.
Should I create a package Moose-Algos-Graph-Lattice or Moose-Algos-Lattice?
Please name it Moose-Algos-Lattice.
If you name it Moose-Algos-Graph-Lattice, then Monticello will think it is a subcategory of Moose-Algos-Graph, due to implicit naming conventions. Actually, it is this implicit mechanism that makes it possible to have multiple Moose-MondrianPaintings-* categories and only one package. However, in Moose we want to keep as much as possible the 1-to-1 mapping between categories and packages.
Cheers, Doru
Doru
Ok for the tests. I'll start creating them now.
Please put them in the newly created package (Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis).
Doru
I'll commit another version in the evening.
thanx Usman
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote: I looked a bit more. The code from Lattice and LatticeNode depends on the logic of Mondrian. This should best be replaced with code that exists in Moose-Algos-Graph.
In the meantime I also created the Moose-Tests-Algos-FormalConceptAnalysis package and added it to the configuration.
Cheers, Doru
On 19 Oct 2011, at 22:36, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Usman,
Please read this email. You just committed another version that broke the build :)
I fixed it again.
Cheers, Doru
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com Subject: fca should not depend on mondrian Date: 19 October 2011 21:23:09 CEST To: Moose-dev Moose Dev moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch
Hi Usman,
I saw that you added the port code to the MooseAlgos repo. Thanks.
Now, during your changes, you inherited the Lattice and the Node from MONode.
This caused Moose to be unloadable and it is wrong from two points of view:
- MONode is not meant to be inherited at all. You are supposed to use Mondrian as a transformation from your domain into the internal Mondrian model.
- MooseAlgos is a basic set of algorithms with no dependencies. Mondrian is higher level. Thus, MooseAlgos cannot depend on Mondrian.
For these reasons, I now removed the inheritance from MONode.
Furthermore, we also need tests for FCA.
Cheers, Doru
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"One cannot do more than one can do."
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Some battles are better lost than fought."
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
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
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
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Be rather willing to give than demanding to get."
Doru, all,
just a reminder that when squeaksource is online you can always use the mirror to get recent versions of everything (it syncs every night). Setting it up is childs play, and once set up it's transparent. See http://dsal.cl/squeaksource
On 21 Oct 2011, at 17:12, Tudor Girba wrote:
I will try after squeaksource gets back online :)
Doru
---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <---
Johan Fabry jfabry@dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
Ack ... Jetlag typo. :-/ I meant: when squeaksource is OFFline. When squeaksource is online you can of course also use it, but it is extra useful when squeaksource is offline ;-)
On 22 Oct 2011, at 16:52, Johan Fabry wrote:
Doru, all,
just a reminder that when squeaksource is online you can always use the mirror to get recent versions of everything (it syncs every night). Setting it up is childs play, and once set up it's transparent. See http://dsal.cl/squeaksource
On 21 Oct 2011, at 17:12, Tudor Girba wrote:
I will try after squeaksource gets back online :)
Doru
---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <---
Johan Fabry jfabry@dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <---
Johan Fabry jfabry@dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
-
Johan Fabry -
Nicolas Anquetil -
Tudor Girba -
Usman Bhatti