[Moose-dev] Re: About instance variable metaclass

[Tudor Girba]

Hi,

I think we should always merge the instance and class side. The reason  
is that I have never felt the need to have them separated in FAMIX,  
because analyses are usually meant to be language independent. Anyone  
else actually had a different experience?

Distinguishing between the types of methods and variables should be  
just enough, and we can kind of do it from a language independent  
point of view. I think that should be enough.

Also, if you have the instance/class sides separated you will  
certainly have different results for analyses than if you have them  
merged, regardless of what you do with the variables.

Cheers,
Doru


On Nov 7, 2008, at 9:00 PM, Michele Lanza wrote:

> I'm not sure whether merging is the right way to go. One argument in
> favor is that otherwise one ends up having a model full of "empty"
> metaclasses, as the large majority of metaclasses do not implement any
> methods. Visually this results in a system complexity view with dual
> inheritance hierarchies. One argument against is that if a metaclass
> does implement methods, in the case of a merge, the metaclass methods
> would be mixed up with the "normal" methods (of course you would still
> be able to differentiate them within the model). Merging would just be
> trying to make up one (of the very few) shortcoming(s) of Smalltalk's
> design. With respect to shared variables, that's another thing that I
> think is a bit overengineered..
>
> Cheers
>
> Michele
>
>
> On 7-Nov-08, at 8:42 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
>
>>>> As far as I can see, an analysis may depend on whether you merge
>>>> classes and metaclasses.
>>>> It seems hard to imagine than any analysis should be depend on
>>>> whether
>>>> there is such a merging.
>>>
>>> you mean independent?
>>> If we have the same data represented the same way independently of
>>> merging
>>> we favor that an analysis code does have to have different cases
>>> based
>>> on merging
>>> or not?
>>
>> Maybe there is something I misunderstood. Merging classes and
>> metaclasses when importing means that one single class will represent
>> both the class and its metaclass I guess.
>> This means that there will be twice less classes in a model. A system
>> complexity view on a imported (using merging) smalltalk application
>> will be different than the one with no merging.
>> No?
>>
>> Alexandre
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
>> Alexandre Bergel  http://www.bergel.eu
>> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Moose-dev mailing list
>> Moose-dev at iam.unibe.ch
>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev at iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev

--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.tudorgirba.com/blog

"Value is always contextual."