| Mapping eType of reference to eType of attribute [message #1001891] |
Thu, 17 January 2013 09:15  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
I define an ecore model with Java interfaces:
import java.net.InetAddress;
/**
* @model
*/
public interface net {
/**
* @model dataType="java.net.InetAddress"
*/
InetAddress getAddress();
}
and
import java.net.InetAddress;
import java.util.List;
/**
* @model
*/
public interface nic {
/**
* @model containment="true" required="false" type="java.net.InetAddress"
*/
List<InetAddress> getAddresses();
}
Now, I would expect that ecore uses the same eType for the attribute net.address and the reference nic.addresses. However, it uses two different eTypes: InetAddress for the attribute and InetAddress_1 for the reference.
How can I enforce that the same eType is used? And why is that happening anyways?
I'm using Eclispe Juno.
Thanks,
Martin
[Updated on: Thu, 24 January 2013 06:56] by Moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Mapping eType of reference to eType of attribute [message #1005084 is a reply to message #1005064] |
Thu, 24 January 2013 08:02  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Martin,
Comments below.
On 24/01/2013 1:07 PM, Martin C. wrote:
> Let's use a list:
>
> Thanks Hallvard, that explained what happens.
> Also thanks Ed for the pointer to Xcore. However, I'm not quite sure
> if I want to use Xcore. It looks already so similar to Java that I
> could also model with Java classes themselves.
Yes, but as I said, there is little in the way of feedback on what's
wrong with your @model annotations. In your example, not a single one
of the attributes you've specified was sensible in that location.
> Is there a way to specify the name of the EClass/eType? So I could get
> rid of the annoying "_1" name.
Have a look at the generated XyzPackage implementation's @model
annotations to see what data types you've ended up with. Once they're
their and they're marked @model, you have to delete them to get rid of them.
> BTW: I pasted the annotations to the wrong statements in my code
> examples, because I simplified the code to what the problem is. But
> it's fixed now.
What does it look like now?
|
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.42607 seconds
Home