| How to disambiguate com.a.foo.FooPackageImpl and com.b.foo.FooPackageImp [message #417449] |
Mon, 10 March 2008 18:41  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi All,
I've got multiple teams using EMF. One team has built com.a.model which
generats com.a.model.ModelPackageImpl.
Another team generated com.b.model and thus com.b.model.ModelPackageImpl.
A third team tries to write an object using both of these other model
definitions, but the generated code ends up with something like this:
import com.a.model.ModelPackageImpl;
import com.b.model.ModelPackageImpl; <-- ERROR: duplicate import.
I could use fully qualified class names, but that's really ugly. I'm
hoping to find a way to generate code that doesn't require me to make
the last word of my package name unique.
Can I force the PackageImpl names to use the whole package structure?
(maybe even the whole package structure except the com part)
It seems like this would be easy to do, but my googling around didn't
find it. Any help is much appreciated!
Jason Henriksen
|
|
|
| Re: How to disambiguate com.a.foo.FooPackageImpl and com.b.foo.FooPackageImp [message #417451 is a reply to message #417449] |
Mon, 10 March 2008 19:08  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------050600060306050307040402
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Jason,
Comments below.
jason henriksen wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I've got multiple teams using EMF. One team has built com.a.model
> which generats com.a.model.ModelPackageImpl.
It sounds like you have more developers than the EMF team does. :-P
>
> Another team generated com.b.model and thus com.b.model.ModelPackageImpl.
Using unique names like AModelPackage and BModelPackage will make it
easier to use them together at the same time.
>
> A third team tries to write an object using both of these other model
> definitions, but the generated code ends up with something like this:
>
> import com.a.model.ModelPackageImpl;
> import com.b.model.ModelPackageImpl; <-- ERROR: duplicate import.
How surprising is that? :-P Actually, EMF shouldn't generate code
like this directly. It will try to import each one and when it hits a
conflict that one will be fully qualified. But it's not currently smart
enough to look at what's been imported in the target file into account,
see 182692 <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=182692>.
>
> I could use fully qualified class names, but that's really ugly. I'm
> hoping to find a way to generate code that doesn't require me to make
> the last word of my package name unique.
Ensuring that class names are unique seems best. I can't think of a way
to avoid that. You should have a better model prefix than "Model".
>
> Can I force the PackageImpl names to use the whole package structure?
> (maybe even the whole package structure except the com part)
It's the GenPackage's Prefix that needs to be reasonably unique.
>
> It seems like this would be easy to do, but my googling around didn't
> find it. Any help is much appreciated!
Likely using GenPrefix.Prefix set to AModel and BModel would be much better.
>
> Jason Henriksen
>
--------------050600060306050307040402
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Jason,<br>
<br>
Comments below.<br>
<br>
jason henriksen wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:fr4dfa$9tk$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite"><br>
Hi All,
<br>
<br>
I've got multiple teams using EMF. One team has built com.a.model
which generats com.a.model.ModelPackageImpl.
<br>
</blockquote>
It sounds like you have more developers than the EMF team does. :-P<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:fr4dfa$9tk$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite"><br>
Another team generated com.b.model and thus
com.b.model.ModelPackageImpl.
<br>
</blockquote>
Using unique names like AModelPackage and BModelPackage will make it
easier to use them together at the same time.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:fr4dfa$9tk$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite"><br>
A third team tries to write an object using both of these other model
definitions, but the generated code ends up with something like this:
<br>
<br>
import com.a.model.ModelPackageImpl;
<br>
import com.b.model.ModelPackageImpl; <-- ERROR: duplicate import.
<br>
</blockquote>
How surprising is that? :-P Actually, EMF shouldn't generate code
like this directly. It will try to import each one and when it hits a
conflict that one will be fully qualified. But it's not currently
smart enough to look at what's been imported in the target file into
account, see <a name="b182692"
href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=182692">182692</a>.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:fr4dfa$9tk$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite"><br>
I could use fully qualified class names, but that's really ugly. I'm
hoping to find a way to generate code that doesn't require me to make
the last word of my package name unique.
<br>
</blockquote>
Ensuring that class names are unique seems best. I can't think of a
way to avoid that. You should have a better model prefix than "Model".<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:fr4dfa$9tk$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite"><br>
Can I force the PackageImpl names to use the whole package structure?
(maybe even the whole package structure except the com part)
<br>
</blockquote>
It's the GenPackage's Prefix that needs to be reasonably unique.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:fr4dfa$9tk$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite"><br>
It seems like this would be easy to do, but my googling around didn't
find it. Any help is much appreciated!
<br>
</blockquote>
Likely using GenPrefix.Prefix set to AModel and BModel would be much
better.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:fr4dfa$9tk$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite"><br>
Jason Henriksen
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------050600060306050307040402--
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03550 seconds
Home