4:26 p.m.
I suppose that the following list of pragmas means that I have a
collection of behavior entities
Is is correct?
<MSEProperty: #candidates type: #FAMIXBehaviouralEntity opposite:
#incomingInvocations> <multivalued>
Now it means that I cannot interpret the first pragma in isolation?
I not sure I like that design
Stef
10:47 p.m.
Yes, this is correct.
I think in the case of Fame it makes some sense to have it like this,
because from the Fame point of view multivalued is but an optional
property of the property.
But, where do you need to interpret these pragmas?
Cheers,
Doru
On Nov 19, 2008, at 4:26 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I suppose that the following list of pragmas means that I have a
collection of behavior entities
Is is correct?
<MSEProperty: #candidates type: #FAMIXBehaviouralEntity opposite:
#incomingInvocations> <multivalued>
Now it means that I cannot interpret the first pragma in isolation?
I not sure I like that design
Stef
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.tudorgirba.com/blog
"Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting
is the right one."
12:50 p.m.
On Nov 20, 2008, at 10:47 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Yes, this is correct.
I think in the case of Fame it makes some sense to have it like this,
because from the Fame point of view multivalued is but an optional
property of the property.
But, where do you need to interpret these pragmas?
no yet.
adrian proposed
> Would that be fine with you:
>
> <FM3Property:type:>
> <FM3Property:type:multivalued:>
> <FM3Property:type:opposite:>
> <FM3Property:type:opposite:multivalued:>
> <FM3Property:type:derived:>
> <FM3Property:type:multivalued:derived:>
> <FM3Property:type:opposite:derived:>
> <FM3Property:type:opposite:multivalued:derived:>
>
> ???
Cheers,
Doru
On Nov 19, 2008, at 4:26 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> I suppose that the following list of pragmas means that I have a
> collection of behavior entities
> Is is correct?
>
> <MSEProperty: #candidates type: #FAMIXBehaviouralEntity opposite:
> #incomingInvocations> <multivalued>
>
> Now it means that I cannot interpret the first pragma in isolation?
> I not sure I like that design
>
> Stef
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.tudorgirba.com/blog
"Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting
is the right one."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
1:45 p.m.
Indeed, I think those would be better.
Cheers,
Doru
On Nov 21, 2008, at 12:50 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On Nov 20, 2008, at 10:47 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
> Yes, this is correct.
>
> I think in the case of Fame it makes some sense to have it like this,
> because from the Fame point of view multivalued is but an optional
> property of the property.
>
> But, where do you need to interpret these pragmas?
no yet.
adrian proposed
>> Would that be fine with you:
>>
>> <FM3Property:type:>
>> <FM3Property:type:multivalued:>
>> <FM3Property:type:opposite:>
>> <FM3Property:type:opposite:multivalued:>
>> <FM3Property:type:derived:>
>> <FM3Property:type:multivalued:derived:>
>> <FM3Property:type:opposite:derived:>
>> <FM3Property:type:opposite:multivalued:derived:>
>>
>> ???
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Doru
>
>
> On Nov 19, 2008, at 4:26 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>
>> I suppose that the following list of pragmas means that I have a
>> collection of behavior entities
>> Is is correct?
>>
>> <MSEProperty: #candidates type: #FAMIXBehaviouralEntity opposite:
>> #incomingInvocations> <multivalued>
>>
>> Now it means that I cannot interpret the first pragma in isolation?
>> I not sure I like that design
>>
>> Stef
>> _______________________________________________
>> Moose-dev mailing list
>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>
> --
> www.tudorgirba.com
> www.tudorgirba.com/blog
>
> "Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting
> is the right one."
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.tudorgirba.com/blog
"Obvious things are difficult to teach."
10:12 a.m.
New subject: sqMoose-About method kind
Hi all,
In Famix2Method, there is a property #kind:
-------
kind
<MSEProperty: #kind type: #String>
^ kind
-------
Can we put it in Famix3 ?
A lot of testing methods (like isConstant) are based on it.
Thanks
Jannik
10:52 a.m.
New subject: sqMoose-About method kind
On 25 nov. 08, at 10:12, jannik.laval.gmail wrote:
Hi all,
In Famix2Method, there is a property #kind:
-------
kind
<MSEProperty: #kind type: #String>
^ kind
-------
Can we put it in Famix3 ?
A lot of testing methods (like isConstant) are based on it.
To me, it looks like an extension of the Famix model. Perhaps we can
put it in an extension category.
If you go for it, have a look at
SmalltalkMethodVisitor>>classifyMethodNode to build such property.
You also have to decide how to implement it, for example using
#privateState (see #hasClassScope)
--
Simon
11 a.m.
New subject: sqMoose-About method kind
On Nov 25, 2008, at 10:52 AM, Simon Denier wrote:
On 25 nov. 08, at 10:12, jannik.laval.gmail wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In Famix2Method, there is a property #kind:
>
> -------
> kind
> <MSEProperty: #kind type: #String>
> ^ kind
> -------
>
> Can we put it in Famix3 ?
> A lot of testing methods (like isConstant) are based on it.
To me, it looks like an extension of the Famix model. Perhaps we can
put it in an extension category.
Probably.
Right now we code them and after we will have to think
If you go for it, have a look at
SmalltalkMethodVisitor>>classifyMethodNode to build such property.
You also have to decide how to implement it, for example using
#privateState (see #hasClassScope)
--
Simon
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
5235
days inactive
5241
days old
6 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
jannik.laval.gmail -
Simon Denier -
Stéphane Ducasse -
Stéphane Ducasse -
Tudor Girba