Unexpected behavior in Moose/VerveineJ superclass

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Unexpected behavior in Moose/VerveineJ superclass

Mircea Filip Lungu
Hi guys!

We've been looking with Alex today at a model built with VerveineJ and imported in Moose. 

In the following example: 
public class OrderedKAryTree<V, E> extends AbstractTypedGraph<V, E> implements Tree<V, E> 

If I obtain the object referring to the OrderedKAryTree and I call superclass I get Tree instead of AbstractTypedGraph. 

However, if I call directSuperclasses I get both Tree and AbstractTypedGraph. 

Is this normal behavior?

Thanks,
M.

* Code available at: 

_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unexpected behavior in Moose/VerveineJ superclass

Tudor Girba-2
Hi,

superclass simply takes one of the super FAMIXClass objects. It would indeed be better if we would take the first FAMIXClass that is not interface.

I am offline until next week. Can someone else look into this?

Doru


On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Mircea Filip Lungu <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi guys!

We've been looking with Alex today at a model built with VerveineJ and imported in Moose. 

In the following example: 
public class OrderedKAryTree<V, E> extends AbstractTypedGraph<V, E> implements Tree<V, E> 

If I obtain the object referring to the OrderedKAryTree and I call superclass I get Tree instead of AbstractTypedGraph. 

However, if I call directSuperclasses I get both Tree and AbstractTypedGraph. 

Is this normal behavior?

Thanks,
M.

* Code available at: 

_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev




--

"Every thing has its own flow"

_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unexpected behavior in Moose/VerveineJ superclass

Mircea Filip Lungu-2
Hi Doru,

So it's FAMIX!
I can take care of fixing that.

Cheers,
M.




2014-05-09 21:03 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <[hidden email]>:
Hi,

superclass simply takes one of the super FAMIXClass objects. It would indeed be better if we would take the first FAMIXClass that is not interface.

I am offline until next week. Can someone else look into this?

Doru


On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Mircea Filip Lungu <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi guys!

We've been looking with Alex today at a model built with VerveineJ and imported in Moose. 

In the following example: 
public class OrderedKAryTree<V, E> extends AbstractTypedGraph<V, E> implements Tree<V, E> 

If I obtain the object referring to the OrderedKAryTree and I call superclass I get Tree instead of AbstractTypedGraph. 

However, if I call directSuperclasses I get both Tree and AbstractTypedGraph. 

Is this normal behavior?

Thanks,
M.

* Code available at: 

_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev




--

"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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unexpected behavior in Moose/VerveineJ superclass

Tudor Girba-2
Excellent.

Thanks,
Doru


On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Mircea Filip Lungu <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Doru,

So it's FAMIX!
I can take care of fixing that.

Cheers,
M.




2014-05-09 21:03 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <[hidden email]>:

Hi,

superclass simply takes one of the super FAMIXClass objects. It would indeed be better if we would take the first FAMIXClass that is not interface.

I am offline until next week. Can someone else look into this?

Doru


On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Mircea Filip Lungu <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi guys!

We've been looking with Alex today at a model built with VerveineJ and imported in Moose. 

In the following example: 
public class OrderedKAryTree<V, E> extends AbstractTypedGraph<V, E> implements Tree<V, E> 

If I obtain the object referring to the OrderedKAryTree and I call superclass I get Tree instead of AbstractTypedGraph. 

However, if I call directSuperclasses I get both Tree and AbstractTypedGraph. 

Is this normal behavior?

Thanks,
M.

* Code available at: 

_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev




--

"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




--

"Every thing has its own flow"

_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev