|Re: Refining Execution Mode [message #511650 is a reply to message #511629]
||Tue, 02 February 2010 12:05
| Vincent MAHE
Registered: July 2009
Julio a écrit :|
> I do not understand the difference implied by just saying "in place"
> transformation, by contrast with a "copy". Is there some pointer
> manipulation assumed (in ATL VM)? That it is faster I cannot asses
> either, perhaps you know of a benchmark suite, or have a complexity
> analysis at hand that you would like to share with us ;)
> In any case, a copy is linear, sorting/rearranging-elements is another
Yes but as in EMF the order is the one the model have been created with,
you cannot expect a refining mode (which only change element to be
modified) to do your ordering work. You have taken benefit of a bad
respect of refining semantic in ATL2, when ATL3 is more effective on the
> I do not understand either the remark about reproducing in ATL3 the ATL2
> refining operation. Do you mean to program the refinement of ATL2 as a
> standard transformation?
> My problem at hand is "simple" (I want to believe): Given a model sort
> the occurrence of its elements according to a given comparison relation.
> Clearly models are big trees, and I do mean to "reorder" arbitrary
> subtrees, not only those at the same level.
> I do not mean to add/change-values-of model elements, but their "order"
> of ocurrence.
> As far as I can see
> the question remains: What does refining mean in the ATL3 context?
> (possibly with respect to refining in ATL2)
Ingénieur plate-forme - Cesar/Artemisia - Équipe Espresso
IRISA-INRIA, Campus de Beaulieu, 35042 Rennes cedex, France
Tél: +33 (0) 2 99 84 71 00, Fax: +33 (0) 2 99 84 71 71
Powered by FUDForum
. Page generated in 0.02398 seconds