Home » Eclipse Projects » GEF » Logic and Flow editors design
| Logic and Flow editors design [message #93370] |
Wed, 10 September 2003 10:39  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: vgusev.graphlogic.com
Hello,
I am studying the Logic and Flow editor designs and try to reconcile them
with the Chapter 13, Editors, of "The Java Developer's Guide To Eclipse"
book. In particular, I am interested in the editor - model interaction. The
book suggest to use the content provider class as a facilitator and
decoupler in this interaction. The content provider also is used to listen
for the model change events and force the editor update.
I was looking for this kind of set-up in the Logic and Flow editor examples,
and found only LogicContextMenuProvider or FlowContextMenuProvider which
are used only for context menues.
So my question is why there is no ContentProviders in the Logic and Flow
editors?
Thanks.
Vladimir
|
|
|
| Re: Logic and Flow editors design [message #93442 is a reply to message #93370] |
Wed, 10 September 2003 13:32  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: none.us.ibm.com
ContentProvider's aren't very applicable to graphical editors. They're
great if you are writing a java source ourline, or a view of a file
directory. ContentProvider's are used by JFace Viewers. JFace Viewers and
Workbench Editors are completely separate concepts, which can be used
together. The book is probably referring to editors whose primary function
is to display a list, tree, or table.
In GEF, an EditPart is the equivalent of a mini-contentProvider. There are
many editparts, not just one. It is the bridge between model and view, and
it listens to the model. Please read the GEF tutorial. See
http://www.eclipse.org/gef
"Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
news:bjnd02$nt2$1@eclipse.org...
> Hello,
>
> I am studying the Logic and Flow editor designs and try to reconcile them
> with the Chapter 13, Editors, of "The Java Developer's Guide To Eclipse"
> book. In particular, I am interested in the editor - model interaction.
The
> book suggest to use the content provider class as a facilitator and
> decoupler in this interaction. The content provider also is used to listen
> for the model change events and force the editor update.
> I was looking for this kind of set-up in the Logic and Flow editor
examples,
> and found only LogicContextMenuProvider or FlowContextMenuProvider which
> are used only for context menues.
> So my question is why there is no ContentProviders in the Logic and Flow
> editors?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Vladimir
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Logic and Flow editors design [message #93628 is a reply to message #93442] |
Wed, 10 September 2003 22:09 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: vgusev.graphlogic.com
In your tutorial, you write about two models, View Model and Business Model.
I have a case of two models - the business model is persisted in the
database. How do you think the business model updates by the Graphic Editor
should be handled? In the EditParts? You write (in the EditPart Life-cycle
section) that an EditPart is created by the factory for every domain object.
Then the EditParts are thrown away as soon as the user removes the
corresponding viewer's object. Since the latter is the case, the EditParts
will not be able to handle the deletion of the objects in the Business Model
(as there is no destructors in java where I could put the destruction of the
object in the Business Model;-). It seems that I need something else, some
other type of controller to fully handle the Business Domain. Is this
correct?
Thanks.
Vladimir
"Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:bjnn5r$4k1$1@eclipse.org...
> ContentProvider's aren't very applicable to graphical editors. They're
> great if you are writing a java source ourline, or a view of a file
> directory. ContentProvider's are used by JFace Viewers. JFace Viewers and
> Workbench Editors are completely separate concepts, which can be used
> together. The book is probably referring to editors whose primary
function
> is to display a list, tree, or table.
>
> In GEF, an EditPart is the equivalent of a mini-contentProvider. There
are
> many editparts, not just one. It is the bridge between model and view,
and
> it listens to the model. Please read the GEF tutorial. See
> http://www.eclipse.org/gef
>
> "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> news:bjnd02$nt2$1@eclipse.org...
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am studying the Logic and Flow editor designs and try to reconcile
them
> > with the Chapter 13, Editors, of "The Java Developer's Guide To Eclipse"
> > book. In particular, I am interested in the editor - model interaction.
> The
> > book suggest to use the content provider class as a facilitator and
> > decoupler in this interaction. The content provider also is used to
listen
> > for the model change events and force the editor update.
> > I was looking for this kind of set-up in the Logic and Flow editor
> examples,
> > and found only LogicContextMenuProvider or FlowContextMenuProvider
which
> > are used only for context menues.
> > So my question is why there is no ContentProviders in the Logic and Flow
> > editors?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Vladimir
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Logic and Flow editors design [message #93731 is a reply to message #93628] |
Thu, 11 September 2003 10:11 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: none.us.ibm.com
"Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
news:bjole1$1po$1@eclipse.org...
> In your tutorial, you write about two models, View Model and Business
Model.
> I have a case of two models - the business model is persisted in the
> database. How do you think the business model updates by the Graphic
Editor
> should be handled? In the EditParts? You write (in the EditPart Life-cycle
> section) that an EditPart is created by the factory for every domain
object.
> Then the EditParts are thrown away as soon as the user removes the
> corresponding viewer's object. Since the latter is the case, the EditParts
You're looking at it backwards. The Business Model is deleted, which
notifies the parent of the editpart, which then refreshes its children,
which then "deletes" the editpart corresponding to the model object deleted.
That same EditPart (the one that is going to disappear) is responsible for
providing the command which deletes the model object, and eventually itself.
> will not be able to handle the deletion of the objects in the Business
Model
> (as there is no destructors in java where I could put the destruction of
the
> object in the Business Model;-). It seems that I need something else, some
> other type of controller to fully handle the Business Domain. Is this
> correct?
> Thanks.
>
> Vladimir
> "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> news:bjnn5r$4k1$1@eclipse.org...
> > ContentProvider's aren't very applicable to graphical editors. They're
> > great if you are writing a java source ourline, or a view of a file
> > directory. ContentProvider's are used by JFace Viewers. JFace Viewers
and
> > Workbench Editors are completely separate concepts, which can be used
> > together. The book is probably referring to editors whose primary
> function
> > is to display a list, tree, or table.
> >
> > In GEF, an EditPart is the equivalent of a mini-contentProvider. There
> are
> > many editparts, not just one. It is the bridge between model and view,
> and
> > it listens to the model. Please read the GEF tutorial. See
> > http://www.eclipse.org/gef
> >
> > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > news:bjnd02$nt2$1@eclipse.org...
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I am studying the Logic and Flow editor designs and try to reconcile
> them
> > > with the Chapter 13, Editors, of "The Java Developer's Guide To
Eclipse"
> > > book. In particular, I am interested in the editor - model
interaction.
> > The
> > > book suggest to use the content provider class as a facilitator and
> > > decoupler in this interaction. The content provider also is used to
> listen
> > > for the model change events and force the editor update.
> > > I was looking for this kind of set-up in the Logic and Flow editor
> > examples,
> > > and found only LogicContextMenuProvider or FlowContextMenuProvider
> which
> > > are used only for context menues.
> > > So my question is why there is no ContentProviders in the Logic and
Flow
> > > editors?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Vladimir
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Logic and Flow editors design [message #93746 is a reply to message #93731] |
Thu, 11 September 2003 10:19 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: vgusev.graphlogic.com
No, I was describing an opposite use case:
1) the end user deletes a graphical representation of the business domain
object;
2) the corresponding EditPart gets deleted
3) the domain business object is not deleted, because the only reference to
it was in the EditPart that does not exist anymore.
Vladimir
"Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:bjpvov$8ng$1@eclipse.org...
>
> "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> news:bjole1$1po$1@eclipse.org...
> > In your tutorial, you write about two models, View Model and Business
> Model.
> > I have a case of two models - the business model is persisted in the
> > database. How do you think the business model updates by the Graphic
> Editor
> > should be handled? In the EditParts? You write (in the EditPart
Life-cycle
> > section) that an EditPart is created by the factory for every domain
> object.
> > Then the EditParts are thrown away as soon as the user removes the
> > corresponding viewer's object. Since the latter is the case, the
EditParts
>
> You're looking at it backwards. The Business Model is deleted, which
> notifies the parent of the editpart, which then refreshes its children,
> which then "deletes" the editpart corresponding to the model object
deleted.
>
> That same EditPart (the one that is going to disappear) is responsible for
> providing the command which deletes the model object, and eventually
itself.
>
> > will not be able to handle the deletion of the objects in the Business
> Model
> > (as there is no destructors in java where I could put the destruction of
> the
> > object in the Business Model;-). It seems that I need something else,
some
> > other type of controller to fully handle the Business Domain. Is this
> > correct?
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Vladimir
> > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> > news:bjnn5r$4k1$1@eclipse.org...
> > > ContentProvider's aren't very applicable to graphical editors.
They're
> > > great if you are writing a java source ourline, or a view of a file
> > > directory. ContentProvider's are used by JFace Viewers. JFace Viewers
> and
> > > Workbench Editors are completely separate concepts, which can be used
> > > together. The book is probably referring to editors whose primary
> > function
> > > is to display a list, tree, or table.
> > >
> > > In GEF, an EditPart is the equivalent of a mini-contentProvider.
There
> > are
> > > many editparts, not just one. It is the bridge between model and
view,
> > and
> > > it listens to the model. Please read the GEF tutorial. See
> > > http://www.eclipse.org/gef
> > >
> > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > > news:bjnd02$nt2$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I am studying the Logic and Flow editor designs and try to reconcile
> > them
> > > > with the Chapter 13, Editors, of "The Java Developer's Guide To
> Eclipse"
> > > > book. In particular, I am interested in the editor - model
> interaction.
> > > The
> > > > book suggest to use the content provider class as a facilitator and
> > > > decoupler in this interaction. The content provider also is used to
> > listen
> > > > for the model change events and force the editor update.
> > > > I was looking for this kind of set-up in the Logic and Flow editor
> > > examples,
> > > > and found only LogicContextMenuProvider or FlowContextMenuProvider
> > which
> > > > are used only for context menues.
> > > > So my question is why there is no ContentProviders in the Logic and
> Flow
> > > > editors?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Vladimir
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Logic and Flow editors design [message #93795 is a reply to message #93746] |
Thu, 11 September 2003 11:32 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: vgusev.graphlogic.com
I stepped through the Flow example code and see two possibilities to handle
the deletion of the Business Object.
1) In the parent "contents" EditPart - however, how do I delete the parent
Business Object that will be contained in the parent EditPart?
2) In the commands (for example in the DeleteCommand.execute() I could
delete a Business Object, which is represented by a view model object
(Transition, for example). However, this seem to create a pretty tight mix
of the View Model and the Business Model.
What do you think?
Vladimir
"Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
news:bjq088$9c6$1@eclipse.org...
> No, I was describing an opposite use case:
> 1) the end user deletes a graphical representation of the business domain
> object;
> 2) the corresponding EditPart gets deleted
> 3) the domain business object is not deleted, because the only reference
to
> it was in the EditPart that does not exist anymore.
>
> Vladimir
> "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> news:bjpvov$8ng$1@eclipse.org...
> >
> > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > news:bjole1$1po$1@eclipse.org...
> > > In your tutorial, you write about two models, View Model and Business
> > Model.
> > > I have a case of two models - the business model is persisted in the
> > > database. How do you think the business model updates by the Graphic
> > Editor
> > > should be handled? In the EditParts? You write (in the EditPart
> Life-cycle
> > > section) that an EditPart is created by the factory for every domain
> > object.
> > > Then the EditParts are thrown away as soon as the user removes the
> > > corresponding viewer's object. Since the latter is the case, the
> EditParts
> >
> > You're looking at it backwards. The Business Model is deleted, which
> > notifies the parent of the editpart, which then refreshes its children,
> > which then "deletes" the editpart corresponding to the model object
> deleted.
> >
> > That same EditPart (the one that is going to disappear) is responsible
for
> > providing the command which deletes the model object, and eventually
> itself.
> >
> > > will not be able to handle the deletion of the objects in the Business
> > Model
> > > (as there is no destructors in java where I could put the destruction
of
> > the
> > > object in the Business Model;-). It seems that I need something else,
> some
> > > other type of controller to fully handle the Business Domain. Is this
> > > correct?
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Vladimir
> > > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> > > news:bjnn5r$4k1$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > ContentProvider's aren't very applicable to graphical editors.
> They're
> > > > great if you are writing a java source ourline, or a view of a file
> > > > directory. ContentProvider's are used by JFace Viewers. JFace
Viewers
> > and
> > > > Workbench Editors are completely separate concepts, which can be
used
> > > > together. The book is probably referring to editors whose primary
> > > function
> > > > is to display a list, tree, or table.
> > > >
> > > > In GEF, an EditPart is the equivalent of a mini-contentProvider.
> There
> > > are
> > > > many editparts, not just one. It is the bridge between model and
> view,
> > > and
> > > > it listens to the model. Please read the GEF tutorial. See
> > > > http://www.eclipse.org/gef
> > > >
> > > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:bjnd02$nt2$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > I am studying the Logic and Flow editor designs and try to
reconcile
> > > them
> > > > > with the Chapter 13, Editors, of "The Java Developer's Guide To
> > Eclipse"
> > > > > book. In particular, I am interested in the editor - model
> > interaction.
> > > > The
> > > > > book suggest to use the content provider class as a facilitator
and
> > > > > decoupler in this interaction. The content provider also is used
to
> > > listen
> > > > > for the model change events and force the editor update.
> > > > > I was looking for this kind of set-up in the Logic and Flow editor
> > > > examples,
> > > > > and found only LogicContextMenuProvider or
FlowContextMenuProvider
> > > which
> > > > > are used only for context menues.
> > > > > So my question is why there is no ContentProviders in the Logic
and
> > Flow
> > > > > editors?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > Vladimir
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
| | |
| Re: Logic and Flow editors design [message #93854 is a reply to message #93746] |
Thu, 11 September 2003 15:36 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: none.us.ibm.com
"Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
news:bjq088$9c6$1@eclipse.org...
> No, I was describing an opposite use case:
> 1) the end user deletes a graphical representation of the business domain
> object;
> 2) the corresponding EditPart gets deleted
> 3) the domain business object is not deleted, because the only reference
to
> it was in the EditPart that does not exist anymore.
This is a surprise. How do you persist your busniess objects? When you
undo a delete, where would the object get re-added? Your model should be
stand-alone, meaning it exists by itself, and the editparts just reach into
it. Maybe the article wasn't clear on the term "graphical representation"
(view model) and business model. The graphical representation is not the
figures that are used to display the business model.
> Vladimir
> "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> news:bjpvov$8ng$1@eclipse.org...
> >
> > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > news:bjole1$1po$1@eclipse.org...
> > > In your tutorial, you write about two models, View Model and Business
> > Model.
> > > I have a case of two models - the business model is persisted in the
> > > database. How do you think the business model updates by the Graphic
> > Editor
> > > should be handled? In the EditParts? You write (in the EditPart
> Life-cycle
> > > section) that an EditPart is created by the factory for every domain
> > object.
> > > Then the EditParts are thrown away as soon as the user removes the
> > > corresponding viewer's object. Since the latter is the case, the
> EditParts
> >
> > You're looking at it backwards. The Business Model is deleted, which
> > notifies the parent of the editpart, which then refreshes its children,
> > which then "deletes" the editpart corresponding to the model object
> deleted.
> >
> > That same EditPart (the one that is going to disappear) is responsible
for
> > providing the command which deletes the model object, and eventually
> itself.
> >
> > > will not be able to handle the deletion of the objects in the Business
> > Model
> > > (as there is no destructors in java where I could put the destruction
of
> > the
> > > object in the Business Model;-). It seems that I need something else,
> some
> > > other type of controller to fully handle the Business Domain. Is this
> > > correct?
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Vladimir
> > > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> > > news:bjnn5r$4k1$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > ContentProvider's aren't very applicable to graphical editors.
> They're
> > > > great if you are writing a java source ourline, or a view of a file
> > > > directory. ContentProvider's are used by JFace Viewers. JFace
Viewers
> > and
> > > > Workbench Editors are completely separate concepts, which can be
used
> > > > together. The book is probably referring to editors whose primary
> > > function
> > > > is to display a list, tree, or table.
> > > >
> > > > In GEF, an EditPart is the equivalent of a mini-contentProvider.
> There
> > > are
> > > > many editparts, not just one. It is the bridge between model and
> view,
> > > and
> > > > it listens to the model. Please read the GEF tutorial. See
> > > > http://www.eclipse.org/gef
> > > >
> > > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:bjnd02$nt2$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > I am studying the Logic and Flow editor designs and try to
reconcile
> > > them
> > > > > with the Chapter 13, Editors, of "The Java Developer's Guide To
> > Eclipse"
> > > > > book. In particular, I am interested in the editor - model
> > interaction.
> > > > The
> > > > > book suggest to use the content provider class as a facilitator
and
> > > > > decoupler in this interaction. The content provider also is used
to
> > > listen
> > > > > for the model change events and force the editor update.
> > > > > I was looking for this kind of set-up in the Logic and Flow editor
> > > > examples,
> > > > > and found only LogicContextMenuProvider or
FlowContextMenuProvider
> > > which
> > > > > are used only for context menues.
> > > > > So my question is why there is no ContentProviders in the Logic
and
> > Flow
> > > > > editors?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > Vladimir
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Logic and Flow editors design [message #93870 is a reply to message #93854] |
Thu, 11 September 2003 15:47 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: vgusev.graphlogic.com
Hm... You are repeating the question that I am asking. Again, everybody
agrees that "the business object should be standalone". My question is "how
to link it to the editparts, so that they "just reach into it?".
Thanks,
Vladimir
"Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:bjqiq6$u2p$1@eclipse.org...
>
> "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> news:bjq088$9c6$1@eclipse.org...
> > No, I was describing an opposite use case:
> > 1) the end user deletes a graphical representation of the business
domain
> > object;
> > 2) the corresponding EditPart gets deleted
> > 3) the domain business object is not deleted, because the only reference
> to
> > it was in the EditPart that does not exist anymore.
>
> This is a surprise. How do you persist your busniess objects? When you
> undo a delete, where would the object get re-added? Your model should be
> stand-alone, meaning it exists by itself, and the editparts just reach
into
> it. Maybe the article wasn't clear on the term "graphical representation"
> (view model) and business model. The graphical representation is not the
> figures that are used to display the business model.
>
> > Vladimir
> > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> > news:bjpvov$8ng$1@eclipse.org...
> > >
> > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > > news:bjole1$1po$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > In your tutorial, you write about two models, View Model and
Business
> > > Model.
> > > > I have a case of two models - the business model is persisted in the
> > > > database. How do you think the business model updates by the Graphic
> > > Editor
> > > > should be handled? In the EditParts? You write (in the EditPart
> > Life-cycle
> > > > section) that an EditPart is created by the factory for every domain
> > > object.
> > > > Then the EditParts are thrown away as soon as the user removes the
> > > > corresponding viewer's object. Since the latter is the case, the
> > EditParts
> > >
> > > You're looking at it backwards. The Business Model is deleted, which
> > > notifies the parent of the editpart, which then refreshes its
children,
> > > which then "deletes" the editpart corresponding to the model object
> > deleted.
> > >
> > > That same EditPart (the one that is going to disappear) is responsible
> for
> > > providing the command which deletes the model object, and eventually
> > itself.
> > >
> > > > will not be able to handle the deletion of the objects in the
Business
> > > Model
> > > > (as there is no destructors in java where I could put the
destruction
> of
> > > the
> > > > object in the Business Model;-). It seems that I need something
else,
> > some
> > > > other type of controller to fully handle the Business Domain. Is
this
> > > > correct?
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Vladimir
> > > > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:bjnn5r$4k1$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > > ContentProvider's aren't very applicable to graphical editors.
> > They're
> > > > > great if you are writing a java source ourline, or a view of a
file
> > > > > directory. ContentProvider's are used by JFace Viewers. JFace
> Viewers
> > > and
> > > > > Workbench Editors are completely separate concepts, which can be
> used
> > > > > together. The book is probably referring to editors whose primary
> > > > function
> > > > > is to display a list, tree, or table.
> > > > >
> > > > > In GEF, an EditPart is the equivalent of a mini-contentProvider.
> > There
> > > > are
> > > > > many editparts, not just one. It is the bridge between model and
> > view,
> > > > and
> > > > > it listens to the model. Please read the GEF tutorial. See
> > > > > http://www.eclipse.org/gef
> > > > >
> > > > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:bjnd02$nt2$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am studying the Logic and Flow editor designs and try to
> reconcile
> > > > them
> > > > > > with the Chapter 13, Editors, of "The Java Developer's Guide To
> > > Eclipse"
> > > > > > book. In particular, I am interested in the editor - model
> > > interaction.
> > > > > The
> > > > > > book suggest to use the content provider class as a facilitator
> and
> > > > > > decoupler in this interaction. The content provider also is used
> to
> > > > listen
> > > > > > for the model change events and force the editor update.
> > > > > > I was looking for this kind of set-up in the Logic and Flow
editor
> > > > > examples,
> > > > > > and found only LogicContextMenuProvider or
> FlowContextMenuProvider
> > > > which
> > > > > > are used only for context menues.
> > > > > > So my question is why there is no ContentProviders in the Logic
> and
> > > Flow
> > > > > > editors?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Vladimir
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Logic and Flow editors design [message #93899 is a reply to message #93870] |
Thu, 11 September 2003 16:10 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: none.us.ibm.com
Assuming we haven't mis-communicated, it's simple. The EditPart holds onto
both the business model, and the view model. While the default and common
case in GEF is that there is a single model object, there are many cases
where there are 2 or more model objects. When I say "holds onto", I mean it
has a field pointing to the objects. But, in the model, there is a
relationship somewhere between the "diagram" and the "view" for the view
model, and between the "namespace" and the "class" for the business model.
These relationships are the ones which get broken during delete, and these
relationships are how your classes and views get persisted when you save the
editor. The editparts are just there for editing :-)
"Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
news:bjqjdp$ulq$1@eclipse.org...
> Hm... You are repeating the question that I am asking. Again, everybody
> agrees that "the business object should be standalone". My question is
"how
> to link it to the editparts, so that they "just reach into it?".
>
> Thanks,
>
> Vladimir
> "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> news:bjqiq6$u2p$1@eclipse.org...
> >
> > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > news:bjq088$9c6$1@eclipse.org...
> > > No, I was describing an opposite use case:
> > > 1) the end user deletes a graphical representation of the business
> domain
> > > object;
> > > 2) the corresponding EditPart gets deleted
> > > 3) the domain business object is not deleted, because the only
reference
> > to
> > > it was in the EditPart that does not exist anymore.
> >
> > This is a surprise. How do you persist your busniess objects? When you
> > undo a delete, where would the object get re-added? Your model should
be
> > stand-alone, meaning it exists by itself, and the editparts just reach
> into
> > it. Maybe the article wasn't clear on the term "graphical
representation"
> > (view model) and business model. The graphical representation is not
the
> > figures that are used to display the business model.
> >
> > > Vladimir
> > > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> > > news:bjpvov$8ng$1@eclipse.org...
> > > >
> > > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:bjole1$1po$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > > In your tutorial, you write about two models, View Model and
> Business
> > > > Model.
> > > > > I have a case of two models - the business model is persisted in
the
> > > > > database. How do you think the business model updates by the
Graphic
> > > > Editor
> > > > > should be handled? In the EditParts? You write (in the EditPart
> > > Life-cycle
> > > > > section) that an EditPart is created by the factory for every
domain
> > > > object.
> > > > > Then the EditParts are thrown away as soon as the user removes the
> > > > > corresponding viewer's object. Since the latter is the case, the
> > > EditParts
> > > >
> > > > You're looking at it backwards. The Business Model is deleted,
which
> > > > notifies the parent of the editpart, which then refreshes its
> children,
> > > > which then "deletes" the editpart corresponding to the model object
> > > deleted.
> > > >
> > > > That same EditPart (the one that is going to disappear) is
responsible
> > for
> > > > providing the command which deletes the model object, and eventually
> > > itself.
> > > >
> > > > > will not be able to handle the deletion of the objects in the
> Business
> > > > Model
> > > > > (as there is no destructors in java where I could put the
> destruction
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > object in the Business Model;-). It seems that I need something
> else,
> > > some
> > > > > other type of controller to fully handle the Business Domain. Is
> this
> > > > > correct?
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > Vladimir
> > > > > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:bjnn5r$4k1$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > > > ContentProvider's aren't very applicable to graphical editors.
> > > They're
> > > > > > great if you are writing a java source ourline, or a view of a
> file
> > > > > > directory. ContentProvider's are used by JFace Viewers. JFace
> > Viewers
> > > > and
> > > > > > Workbench Editors are completely separate concepts, which can be
> > used
> > > > > > together. The book is probably referring to editors whose
primary
> > > > > function
> > > > > > is to display a list, tree, or table.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In GEF, an EditPart is the equivalent of a mini-contentProvider.
> > > There
> > > > > are
> > > > > > many editparts, not just one. It is the bridge between model
and
> > > view,
> > > > > and
> > > > > > it listens to the model. Please read the GEF tutorial. See
> > > > > > http://www.eclipse.org/gef
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:bjnd02$nt2$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am studying the Logic and Flow editor designs and try to
> > reconcile
> > > > > them
> > > > > > > with the Chapter 13, Editors, of "The Java Developer's Guide
To
> > > > Eclipse"
> > > > > > > book. In particular, I am interested in the editor - model
> > > > interaction.
> > > > > > The
> > > > > > > book suggest to use the content provider class as a
facilitator
> > and
> > > > > > > decoupler in this interaction. The content provider also is
used
> > to
> > > > > listen
> > > > > > > for the model change events and force the editor update.
> > > > > > > I was looking for this kind of set-up in the Logic and Flow
> editor
> > > > > > examples,
> > > > > > > and found only LogicContextMenuProvider or
> > FlowContextMenuProvider
> > > > > which
> > > > > > > are used only for context menues.
> > > > > > > So my question is why there is no ContentProviders in the
Logic
> > and
> > > > Flow
> > > > > > > editors?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Vladimir
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Logic and Flow editors design [message #93928 is a reply to message #93899] |
Thu, 11 September 2003 16:58 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: vgusev.graphlogic.com
Thanks, this helps.
Vladimir
"Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:bjqkoo$db$1@eclipse.org...
> Assuming we haven't mis-communicated, it's simple. The EditPart holds
onto
> both the business model, and the view model. While the default and common
> case in GEF is that there is a single model object, there are many cases
> where there are 2 or more model objects. When I say "holds onto", I mean
it
> has a field pointing to the objects. But, in the model, there is a
> relationship somewhere between the "diagram" and the "view" for the view
> model, and between the "namespace" and the "class" for the business model.
> These relationships are the ones which get broken during delete, and these
> relationships are how your classes and views get persisted when you save
the
> editor. The editparts are just there for editing :-)
>
> "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> news:bjqjdp$ulq$1@eclipse.org...
> > Hm... You are repeating the question that I am asking. Again, everybody
> > agrees that "the business object should be standalone". My question is
> "how
> > to link it to the editparts, so that they "just reach into it?".
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Vladimir
> > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> > news:bjqiq6$u2p$1@eclipse.org...
> > >
> > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > > news:bjq088$9c6$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > No, I was describing an opposite use case:
> > > > 1) the end user deletes a graphical representation of the business
> > domain
> > > > object;
> > > > 2) the corresponding EditPart gets deleted
> > > > 3) the domain business object is not deleted, because the only
> reference
> > > to
> > > > it was in the EditPart that does not exist anymore.
> > >
> > > This is a surprise. How do you persist your busniess objects? When
you
> > > undo a delete, where would the object get re-added? Your model should
> be
> > > stand-alone, meaning it exists by itself, and the editparts just reach
> > into
> > > it. Maybe the article wasn't clear on the term "graphical
> representation"
> > > (view model) and business model. The graphical representation is not
> the
> > > figures that are used to display the business model.
> > >
> > > > Vladimir
> > > > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:bjpvov$8ng$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > >
> > > > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:bjole1$1po$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > > > In your tutorial, you write about two models, View Model and
> > Business
> > > > > Model.
> > > > > > I have a case of two models - the business model is persisted in
> the
> > > > > > database. How do you think the business model updates by the
> Graphic
> > > > > Editor
> > > > > > should be handled? In the EditParts? You write (in the EditPart
> > > > Life-cycle
> > > > > > section) that an EditPart is created by the factory for every
> domain
> > > > > object.
> > > > > > Then the EditParts are thrown away as soon as the user removes
the
> > > > > > corresponding viewer's object. Since the latter is the case, the
> > > > EditParts
> > > > >
> > > > > You're looking at it backwards. The Business Model is deleted,
> which
> > > > > notifies the parent of the editpart, which then refreshes its
> > children,
> > > > > which then "deletes" the editpart corresponding to the model
object
> > > > deleted.
> > > > >
> > > > > That same EditPart (the one that is going to disappear) is
> responsible
> > > for
> > > > > providing the command which deletes the model object, and
eventually
> > > > itself.
> > > > >
> > > > > > will not be able to handle the deletion of the objects in the
> > Business
> > > > > Model
> > > > > > (as there is no destructors in java where I could put the
> > destruction
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > object in the Business Model;-). It seems that I need something
> > else,
> > > > some
> > > > > > other type of controller to fully handle the Business Domain. Is
> > this
> > > > > > correct?
> > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Vladimir
> > > > > > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:bjnn5r$4k1$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > > > > ContentProvider's aren't very applicable to graphical editors.
> > > > They're
> > > > > > > great if you are writing a java source ourline, or a view of a
> > file
> > > > > > > directory. ContentProvider's are used by JFace Viewers. JFace
> > > Viewers
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > Workbench Editors are completely separate concepts, which can
be
> > > used
> > > > > > > together. The book is probably referring to editors whose
> primary
> > > > > > function
> > > > > > > is to display a list, tree, or table.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In GEF, an EditPart is the equivalent of a
mini-contentProvider.
> > > > There
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > many editparts, not just one. It is the bridge between model
> and
> > > > view,
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > it listens to the model. Please read the GEF tutorial. See
> > > > > > > http://www.eclipse.org/gef
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:bjnd02$nt2$1@eclipse.org...
> > > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I am studying the Logic and Flow editor designs and try to
> > > reconcile
> > > > > > them
> > > > > > > > with the Chapter 13, Editors, of "The Java Developer's Guide
> To
> > > > > Eclipse"
> > > > > > > > book. In particular, I am interested in the editor - model
> > > > > interaction.
> > > > > > > The
> > > > > > > > book suggest to use the content provider class as a
> facilitator
> > > and
> > > > > > > > decoupler in this interaction. The content provider also is
> used
> > > to
> > > > > > listen
> > > > > > > > for the model change events and force the editor update.
> > > > > > > > I was looking for this kind of set-up in the Logic and Flow
> > editor
> > > > > > > examples,
> > > > > > > > and found only LogicContextMenuProvider or
> > > FlowContextMenuProvider
> > > > > > which
> > > > > > > > are used only for context menues.
> > > > > > > > So my question is why there is no ContentProviders in the
> Logic
> > > and
> > > > > Flow
> > > > > > > > editors?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Vladimir
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Logic and Flow editors design [message #95648 is a reply to message #93899] |
Sat, 27 September 2003 07:05 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: ThisisFake.Fakeness.xyz
Where is final delete done? AS in, I only want to delete when undo becomes
impossible. And of course I do not want to use a finalizer.
And to Vladimir, I have a nice caching class I have been using to cache my
database objects in the VM domain. I could provide if you like. very
small threaded class which is the backbone of all my DB classes. Havent
used in Eclipse yet. Used in JHotDraw.
CL
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 16:10:09 -0400, Randy Hudson wrote:
> Assuming we haven't mis-communicated, it's simple. The EditPart holds onto
> both the business model, and the view model. While the default and common
> case in GEF is that there is a single model object, there are many cases
> where there are 2 or more model objects. When I say "holds onto", I mean it
> has a field pointing to the objects. But, in the model, there is a
> relationship somewhere between the "diagram" and the "view" for the view
> model, and between the "namespace" and the "class" for the business model.
> These relationships are the ones which get broken during delete, and these
> relationships are how your classes and views get persisted when you save the
> editor. The editparts are just there for editing :-)
>
> "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> news:bjqjdp$ulq$1@eclipse.org...
>> Hm... You are repeating the question that I am asking. Again, everybody
>> agrees that "the business object should be standalone". My question is
> "how
>> to link it to the editparts, so that they "just reach into it?".
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Vladimir
>> "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
>> news:bjqiq6$u2p$1@eclipse.org...
>> >
>> > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
>> > news:bjq088$9c6$1@eclipse.org...
>> > > No, I was describing an opposite use case:
>> > > 1) the end user deletes a graphical representation of the business
>> domain
>> > > object;
>> > > 2) the corresponding EditPart gets deleted
>> > > 3) the domain business object is not deleted, because the only
> reference
>> > to
>> > > it was in the EditPart that does not exist anymore.
>> >
>> > This is a surprise. How do you persist your busniess objects? When you
>> > undo a delete, where would the object get re-added? Your model should
> be
>> > stand-alone, meaning it exists by itself, and the editparts just reach
>> into
>> > it. Maybe the article wasn't clear on the term "graphical
> representation"
>> > (view model) and business model. The graphical representation is not
> the
>> > figures that are used to display the business model.
>> >
>> > > Vladimir
>> > > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
>> > > news:bjpvov$8ng$1@eclipse.org...
>> > > >
>> > > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
>> > > > news:bjole1$1po$1@eclipse.org...
>> > > > > In your tutorial, you write about two models, View Model and
>> Business
>> > > > Model.
>> > > > > I have a case of two models - the business model is persisted in
> the
>> > > > > database. How do you think the business model updates by the
> Graphic
>> > > > Editor
>> > > > > should be handled? In the EditParts? You write (in the EditPart
>> > > Life-cycle
>> > > > > section) that an EditPart is created by the factory for every
> domain
>> > > > object.
>> > > > > Then the EditParts are thrown away as soon as the user removes the
>> > > > > corresponding viewer's object. Since the latter is the case, the
>> > > EditParts
>> > > >
>> > > > You're looking at it backwards. The Business Model is deleted,
> which
>> > > > notifies the parent of the editpart, which then refreshes its
>> children,
>> > > > which then "deletes" the editpart corresponding to the model object
>> > > deleted.
>> > > >
>> > > > That same EditPart (the one that is going to disappear) is
> responsible
>> > for
>> > > > providing the command which deletes the model object, and eventually
>> > > itself.
>> > > >
>> > > > > will not be able to handle the deletion of the objects in the
>> Business
>> > > > Model
>> > > > > (as there is no destructors in java where I could put the
>> destruction
>> > of
>> > > > the
>> > > > > object in the Business Model;-). It seems that I need something
>> else,
>> > > some
>> > > > > other type of controller to fully handle the Business Domain. Is
>> this
>> > > > > correct?
>> > > > > Thanks.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Vladimir
>> > > > > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
>> > > > > news:bjnn5r$4k1$1@eclipse.org...
>> > > > > > ContentProvider's aren't very applicable to graphical editors.
>> > > They're
>> > > > > > great if you are writing a java source ourline, or a view of a
>> file
>> > > > > > directory. ContentProvider's are used by JFace Viewers. JFace
>> > Viewers
>> > > > and
>> > > > > > Workbench Editors are completely separate concepts, which can be
>> > used
>> > > > > > together. The book is probably referring to editors whose
> primary
>> > > > > function
>> > > > > > is to display a list, tree, or table.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > In GEF, an EditPart is the equivalent of a mini-contentProvider.
>> > > There
>> > > > > are
>> > > > > > many editparts, not just one. It is the bridge between model
> and
>> > > view,
>> > > > > and
>> > > > > > it listens to the model. Please read the GEF tutorial. See
>> > > > > > http://www.eclipse.org/gef
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
>> > > > > > news:bjnd02$nt2$1@eclipse.org...
>> > > > > > > Hello,
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I am studying the Logic and Flow editor designs and try to
>> > reconcile
>> > > > > them
>> > > > > > > with the Chapter 13, Editors, of "The Java Developer's Guide
> To
>> > > > Eclipse"
>> > > > > > > book. In particular, I am interested in the editor - model
>> > > > interaction.
>> > > > > > The
>> > > > > > > book suggest to use the content provider class as a
> facilitator
>> > and
>> > > > > > > decoupler in this interaction. The content provider also is
> used
>> > to
>> > > > > listen
>> > > > > > > for the model change events and force the editor update.
>> > > > > > > I was looking for this kind of set-up in the Logic and Flow
>> editor
>> > > > > > examples,
>> > > > > > > and found only LogicContextMenuProvider or
>> > FlowContextMenuProvider
>> > > > > which
>> > > > > > > are used only for context menues.
>> > > > > > > So my question is why there is no ContentProviders in the
> Logic
>> > and
>> > > > Flow
>> > > > > > > editors?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Thanks.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Vladimir
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
|
|
|
| Re: Logic and Flow editors design [message #96135 is a reply to message #95648] |
Tue, 30 September 2003 10:10 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: vgusev.graphlogic.com
There is no final delete in the object itself, so I am using the parent
object, in terms of the flow example, it's StructuredActivity.removeChild -
were one can do the deletion in the domain model, corresponding to a
deletion of the child in the GEF's model.
Thanks for offering your code - I think I figured out how to do it using
jdo.
Vladimir
"CL [dnoyeB] Gilbert" <ThisisFake@Fakeness.xyz> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.09.27.11.05.42.204283@Fakeness.xyz...
>
> Where is final delete done? AS in, I only want to delete when undo
becomes
> impossible. And of course I do not want to use a finalizer.
>
> And to Vladimir, I have a nice caching class I have been using to cache my
> database objects in the VM domain. I could provide if you like. very
> small threaded class which is the backbone of all my DB classes. Havent
> used in Eclipse yet. Used in JHotDraw.
>
> CL
>
>
> On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 16:10:09 -0400, Randy Hudson wrote:
>
> > Assuming we haven't mis-communicated, it's simple. The EditPart holds
onto
> > both the business model, and the view model. While the default and
common
> > case in GEF is that there is a single model object, there are many cases
> > where there are 2 or more model objects. When I say "holds onto", I
mean it
> > has a field pointing to the objects. But, in the model, there is a
> > relationship somewhere between the "diagram" and the "view" for the view
> > model, and between the "namespace" and the "class" for the business
model.
> > These relationships are the ones which get broken during delete, and
these
> > relationships are how your classes and views get persisted when you save
the
> > editor. The editparts are just there for editing :-)
> >
> > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> > news:bjqjdp$ulq$1@eclipse.org...
> >> Hm... You are repeating the question that I am asking. Again, everybody
> >> agrees that "the business object should be standalone". My question is
> > "how
> >> to link it to the editparts, so that they "just reach into it?".
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Vladimir
> >> "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> >> news:bjqiq6$u2p$1@eclipse.org...
> >> >
> >> > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:bjq088$9c6$1@eclipse.org...
> >> > > No, I was describing an opposite use case:
> >> > > 1) the end user deletes a graphical representation of the business
> >> domain
> >> > > object;
> >> > > 2) the corresponding EditPart gets deleted
> >> > > 3) the domain business object is not deleted, because the only
> > reference
> >> > to
> >> > > it was in the EditPart that does not exist anymore.
> >> >
> >> > This is a surprise. How do you persist your busniess objects? When
you
> >> > undo a delete, where would the object get re-added? Your model
should
> > be
> >> > stand-alone, meaning it exists by itself, and the editparts just
reach
> >> into
> >> > it. Maybe the article wasn't clear on the term "graphical
> > representation"
> >> > (view model) and business model. The graphical representation is not
> > the
> >> > figures that are used to display the business model.
> >> >
> >> > > Vladimir
> >> > > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> >> > > news:bjpvov$8ng$1@eclipse.org...
> >> > > >
> >> > > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> >> > > > news:bjole1$1po$1@eclipse.org...
> >> > > > > In your tutorial, you write about two models, View Model and
> >> Business
> >> > > > Model.
> >> > > > > I have a case of two models - the business model is persisted
in
> > the
> >> > > > > database. How do you think the business model updates by the
> > Graphic
> >> > > > Editor
> >> > > > > should be handled? In the EditParts? You write (in the EditPart
> >> > > Life-cycle
> >> > > > > section) that an EditPart is created by the factory for every
> > domain
> >> > > > object.
> >> > > > > Then the EditParts are thrown away as soon as the user removes
the
> >> > > > > corresponding viewer's object. Since the latter is the case,
the
> >> > > EditParts
> >> > > >
> >> > > > You're looking at it backwards. The Business Model is deleted,
> > which
> >> > > > notifies the parent of the editpart, which then refreshes its
> >> children,
> >> > > > which then "deletes" the editpart corresponding to the model
object
> >> > > deleted.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > That same EditPart (the one that is going to disappear) is
> > responsible
> >> > for
> >> > > > providing the command which deletes the model object, and
eventually
> >> > > itself.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > will not be able to handle the deletion of the objects in the
> >> Business
> >> > > > Model
> >> > > > > (as there is no destructors in java where I could put the
> >> destruction
> >> > of
> >> > > > the
> >> > > > > object in the Business Model;-). It seems that I need something
> >> else,
> >> > > some
> >> > > > > other type of controller to fully handle the Business Domain.
Is
> >> this
> >> > > > > correct?
> >> > > > > Thanks.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Vladimir
> >> > > > > "Randy Hudson" <none@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
> >> > > > > news:bjnn5r$4k1$1@eclipse.org...
> >> > > > > > ContentProvider's aren't very applicable to graphical
editors.
> >> > > They're
> >> > > > > > great if you are writing a java source ourline, or a view of
a
> >> file
> >> > > > > > directory. ContentProvider's are used by JFace Viewers.
JFace
> >> > Viewers
> >> > > > and
> >> > > > > > Workbench Editors are completely separate concepts, which can
be
> >> > used
> >> > > > > > together. The book is probably referring to editors whose
> > primary
> >> > > > > function
> >> > > > > > is to display a list, tree, or table.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > In GEF, an EditPart is the equivalent of a
mini-contentProvider.
> >> > > There
> >> > > > > are
> >> > > > > > many editparts, not just one. It is the bridge between model
> > and
> >> > > view,
> >> > > > > and
> >> > > > > > it listens to the model. Please read the GEF tutorial. See
> >> > > > > > http://www.eclipse.org/gef
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > "Vladimir" <vgusev@graphlogic.com> wrote in message
> >> > > > > > news:bjnd02$nt2$1@eclipse.org...
> >> > > > > > > Hello,
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > I am studying the Logic and Flow editor designs and try to
> >> > reconcile
> >> > > > > them
> >> > > > > > > with the Chapter 13, Editors, of "The Java Developer's
Guide
> > To
> >> > > > Eclipse"
> >> > > > > > > book. In particular, I am interested in the editor - model
> >> > > > interaction.
> >> > > > > > The
> >> > > > > > > book suggest to use the content provider class as a
> > facilitator
> >> > and
> >> > > > > > > decoupler in this interaction. The content provider also is
> > used
> >> > to
> >> > > > > listen
> >> > > > > > > for the model change events and force the editor update.
> >> > > > > > > I was looking for this kind of set-up in the Logic and Flow
> >> editor
> >> > > > > > examples,
> >> > > > > > > and found only LogicContextMenuProvider or
> >> > FlowContextMenuProvider
> >> > > > > which
> >> > > > > > > are used only for context menues.
> >> > > > > > > So my question is why there is no ContentProviders in the
> > Logic
> >> > and
> >> > > > Flow
> >> > > > > > > editors?
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Thanks.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Vladimir
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
>
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Jul 13 23:15:41 EDT 2025
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.06240 seconds |
Home