25 Sep
2010
25 Sep
'10
9:50 p.m.
On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:20 PM, François Tanguy wrote:
Would it be a good idea to have a bridge between the
two ?
I do not know what is your scenario?
Like generating magritte descriptions from the Fame
pragmas.
do you have an example?
because you mean describing Magritte in fame?
Then we could imagine to have a generic editor for a
metamodel and serialization... (like in EMF)
fame already support the functionality of EMF.
I think that Fame should stay a simple metametamodel.
I wrote a very basic piece of code that does the
transformation from Fame to Magritte in some very specific use case and that is something
that is definitely possible.
What do you think ?
I do not know. what is your need?
Stef
Le 25 sept. 2010 à 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit :
here is my summary
fame is a minimal meta meta model ( 4 or 5 classes): we use it describe other model (such
as Famix)
based on fame you can load and save model.
Magritte is a meta data driven framework.
you describe specific entity and the tools interpret it.
On Sep 25, 2010, at 11:24 AM, François Tanguy wrote:
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev Hi,
being a end user, I am bit confused with these 2 frameworks: Fame and Magritte.
There are both meta-meta-models. So what make them different from a conceptual point of
view ?
For my models, I would like to have the persistency for free (from Fame) and the UI
edition and model validation for free (from Magritte).
Today I must write two times the description of my language (one in Fame and one in
Magritte), and it feels like I would need only one description.
Any info on this would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Francois
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev 
25 Sep
25 Sep
10:18 p.m.
New subject: [Pharo-project] Fame vs Magritte
Hi,
Such a bridge is useful when you want to use the tools built on top of the other
meta-meta-model. For example, in Metanool I started to work on an editor for the Fame
descriptions. To do this, we have a translator of Fame objects into Magritte objects
(hacked with Lukas on some train ride). The code is available at:
"Metanool"
Gofer new
squeaksource: 'Metanool';
package: 'Metanool';
load.
The most interesting method is:
FM3MetaDescription>>asMagritteDescription
Cheers,
Doru
On 25 Sep 2010, at 21:50, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:20 PM, François Tanguy wrote:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Relationships are of two kinds: those we choose and those that happen. They both
matter."
Would it be a good idea to have a bridge between
the two ?
I do not know what is your scenario?
Like generating magritte descriptions from the
Fame pragmas.
do you have an example?
because you mean describing Magritte in fame?
Then we could imagine to have a generic editor
for a metamodel and serialization... (like in EMF)
fame already support the functionality of EMF.
I think that Fame should stay a simple metametamodel.
I wrote a very basic piece of code that does the
transformation from Fame to Magritte in some very specific use case and that is something
that is definitely possible.
What do you think ?
I do not know. what is your need?
Stef
Le 25 sept. 2010 à 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit :
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev here is my summary
fame is a minimal meta meta model ( 4 or 5 classes): we use it describe other model (such
as Famix)
based on fame you can load and save model.
Magritte is a meta data driven framework.
you describe specific entity and the tools interpret it.
On Sep 25, 2010, at 11:24 AM, François Tanguy wrote:
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev Hi,
being a end user, I am bit confused with these 2 frameworks: Fame and Magritte.
There are both meta-meta-models. So what make them different from a conceptual point of
view ?
For my models, I would like to have the persistency for free (from Fame) and the UI
edition and model validation for free (from Magritte).
Today I must write two times the description of my language (one in Fame and one in
Magritte), and it feels like I would need only one description.
Any info on this would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Francois
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev 
26 Sep
26 Sep
12:47 a.m.
New subject: [Pharo-project] Fame vs Magritte
Doru, you got my point.
Thanks for the link, I will have a close look at it.
Le 25 sept. 2010 à 22:18, Tudor Girba a écrit :
Hi,
Such a bridge is useful when you want to use the tools built on top of the other
meta-meta-model. For example, in Metanool I started to work on an editor for the Fame
descriptions. To do this, we have a translator of Fame objects into Magritte objects
(hacked with Lukas on some train ride). The code is available at:
"Metanool"
Gofer new
squeaksource: 'Metanool';
package: 'Metanool';
load.
The most interesting method is:
FM3MetaDescription>>asMagritteDescription
Cheers,
Doru
On 25 Sep 2010, at 21:50, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:20 PM, François Tanguy wrote:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Relationships are of two kinds: those we choose and those that happen. They both
matter."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev Would it be a good idea to have a bridge between
the two ?
I do not know what is your scenario?
Like generating magritte descriptions from the
Fame pragmas.
do you have an example?
because you mean describing Magritte in fame?
Then we could imagine to have a generic editor
for a metamodel and serialization... (like in EMF)
fame already support the functionality of EMF.
I think that Fame should stay a simple metametamodel.
I wrote a very basic piece of code that does the
transformation from Fame to Magritte in some very specific use case and that is something
that is definitely possible.
What do you think ?
I do not know. what is your need?
Stef
Le 25 sept. 2010 à 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit :
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev here is my summary
fame is a minimal meta meta model ( 4 or 5 classes): we use it describe other model (such
as Famix)
based on fame you can load and save model.
Magritte is a meta data driven framework.
you describe specific entity and the tools interpret it.
On Sep 25, 2010, at 11:24 AM, François Tanguy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> being a end user, I am bit confused with these 2 frameworks: Fame and Magritte.
> There are both meta-meta-models. So what make them different from a conceptual point
of view ?
>
> For my models, I would like to have the persistency for free (from Fame) and the UI
edition and model validation for free (from Magritte).
>
> Today I must write two times the description of my language (one in Fame and one in
Magritte), and it feels like I would need only one description.
>
> Any info on this would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Francois
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
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
12:47 a.m.
New subject: [Pharo-project] Fame vs Magritte
Le 25 sept. 2010 à 21:50, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit :
I am just wondering why I must use two languages to describe a metamodel with
constraints.
If I want to express a language structure I must use Fame (to have package, classes,
properties).
If I want to add constraints I must use Magritte.
But when I define Magritte descriptions, I feel like I rewrite the same stuff I did in
Fame (except for the validation part).
Yes, but it is still missing editing tools compared to EMF, or am I wrong ?
I want to describe a language only one time and be able to use tools from Fame and
Magritte.
So with a minimal amount of work, I get serialization, edition, validation, code
generation.
On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:20 PM, François Tanguy wrote:
I would like to edit models in the web browser with seaside components generated with
Magritte and save the models using Fame.
Would it be a good idea to have a bridge between
the two ?
I do not know what is your scenario? Like generating magritte descriptions from the
Fame pragmas.
do you have an example?
because you mean describing Magritte in fame? Then we could imagine to have a generic editor
for a metamodel and serialization... (like in EMF)
fame already support the functionality of EMF.
I think that Fame should stay a simple metametamodel.
I wrote a very basic piece of code that does the
transformation from Fame to Magritte in some very specific use case and that is something
that is definitely possible.
What do you think ?
I do not know. what is your need?
Stef
Le 25 sept. 2010 à 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit :
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev here is my summary
fame is a minimal meta meta model ( 4 or 5 classes): we use it describe other model (such
as Famix)
based on fame you can load and save model.
Magritte is a meta data driven framework.
you describe specific entity and the tools interpret it.
On Sep 25, 2010, at 11:24 AM, François Tanguy wrote:
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev Hi,
being a end user, I am bit confused with these 2 frameworks: Fame and Magritte.
There are both meta-meta-models. So what make them different from a conceptual point of
view ?
For my models, I would like to have the persistency for free (from Fame) and the UI
edition and model validation for free (from Magritte).
Today I must write two times the description of my language (one in Fame and one in
Magritte), and it feels like I would need only one description.
Any info on this would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Francois
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
5202
days inactive
5202
days old
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
François Tanguy -
Stéphane Ducasse -
Tudor Girba