Meta data for new SourceLanguage problem
Locked
Meta data for new SourceLanguage problem
 
|
Hello,
I added a new importer in the Moose Panel and so I can browse my model. It show me that no SourceLanguage was defined so I added my own sourceLanguage, inheriting from FAMIXSourceLanguage. I have a problem is about this call: anObject mooseInterestingEntity mooseDescription allPrimitiveAttributes because mooseDescription return nil. The problem is about asMooseDescription send to my class because it refer to the MooseModel meta dictionnary and my class is not in, so it return nil. I have implemented the class method annotation but it doesn't change anything. How can I have my class in the dictionnary? Thanks in advance. -- Guillaume Larcheveque _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: Meta data for new SourceLanguage problem
|
|
Did you reset the meta-model?
MooseModel resetMeta. On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Guillaume Larcheveque <[hidden email]> wrote: Hello, -- Andre Hora _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: Meta data for new SourceLanguage problem
|
|
No.
It works now. thanks!! 2012/3/23 Andre Hora <[hidden email]> Did you reset the meta-model? -- Guillaume Larcheveque _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: Meta data for new SourceLanguage problem
|
|
On 23/03/12 11:22, Guillaume Larcheveque wrote:
No. Andre is studying domain specific rules They are rules checked by smalllint that are specific to the application domain (as opposed to a generic rule such as "class should be commented"). The kind of stuff that could have helped Guillaume here may be? These rules seem to be very interesting for the stability and quality of the application. So it would be a good idea to have more for moose (Andre told me that there are already some). If you can think of a domain specific rule for Moose that seems possible to check automatically with lint, just let us know, and Andre will try to implement it. Moose will benefit from it and Andre's study will too. nicolas _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: Meta data for new SourceLanguage problem
|
|
Hi,
Great. Please take a look at the OnMoose-Report package in the Arki repository. The idea of this project is to hold a set of rules that are specific to Moose: Gofer new squeaksource: 'Arki'; package: 'OnMoose-Report'; load. (OnMooseReport on: MooseScripts createModelForConfigurationOfMoose) open. These rules are built with Arki, not with SmallLint. The idea of using Arki is that you get also a browser that can be customized for every rule. Also, at the moment, they are based on a Moose model, rather than directly Smalltalk. However, this is not binding. It should be quite easy to extend this to include SmallLint rules as well. I would love to get more rules to check the Moose components. Cheers, Doru On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Nicolas Anquetil <[hidden email]> wrote: > On 23/03/12 11:22, Guillaume Larcheveque wrote: > > No. > > It works now. > > thanks!! > > 2012/3/23 Andre Hora <[hidden email]> >> >> Did you reset the meta-model? >> >> MooseModel resetMeta. > > > Andre is studying domain specific rules > > They are rules checked by smalllint that are specific to the application > domain (as opposed to a generic rule such as "class should be commented"). > The kind of stuff that could have helped Guillaume here may be? > > These rules seem to be very interesting for the stability and quality of the > application. > So it would be a good idea to have more for moose (Andre told me that there > are already some). > > If you can think of a domain specific rule for Moose that seems possible to > check automatically with lint, just let us know, and Andre will try to > implement it. > > Moose will benefit from it and Andre's study will too. > > nicolas > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow" _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: Meta data for new SourceLanguage problem
|
|
Thanks Doru,
These are the ones I told Nicolas (I implemented some rules some time ago in OnMoose-Report). I will have a look in more details. I know that Andy also implement some rules specific to Moose I guess in eContracts. regards, On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: Hi, -- Andre Hora _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: Meta data for new SourceLanguage problem
|
|
In reply to this post by Tudor Girba-2
+1
like offering the right meta model. Setf On Mar 23, 2012, at 12:12 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: > Hi, > > Great. Please take a look at the OnMoose-Report package in the Arki > repository. The idea of this project is to hold a set of rules that > are specific to Moose: > > Gofer new > squeaksource: 'Arki'; > package: 'OnMoose-Report'; > load. > > (OnMooseReport on: MooseScripts createModelForConfigurationOfMoose) open. > > > These rules are built with Arki, not with SmallLint. The idea of using > Arki is that you get also a browser that can be customized for every > rule. > > Also, at the moment, they are based on a Moose model, rather than > directly Smalltalk. However, this is not binding. It should be quite > easy to extend this to include SmallLint rules as well. > > I would love to get more rules to check the Moose components. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Nicolas Anquetil > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> On 23/03/12 11:22, Guillaume Larcheveque wrote: >> >> No. >> >> It works now. >> >> thanks!! >> >> 2012/3/23 Andre Hora <[hidden email]> >>> >>> Did you reset the meta-model? >>> >>> MooseModel resetMeta. >> >> >> Andre is studying domain specific rules >> >> They are rules checked by smalllint that are specific to the application >> domain (as opposed to a generic rule such as "class should be commented"). >> The kind of stuff that could have helped Guillaume here may be? >> >> These rules seem to be very interesting for the stability and quality of the >> application. >> So it would be a good idea to have more for moose (Andre told me that there >> are already some). >> >> If you can think of a domain specific rule for Moose that seems possible to >> check automatically with lint, just let us know, and Andre will try to >> implement it. >> >> Moose will benefit from it and Andre's study will too. >> >> nicolas >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow" > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
«
Return to Moose
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |