|
| Re: ComposedAdapterFactory delegates to generated factory for dynamic EObject [message #1117291 is a reply to message #1117247] |
Thu, 26 September 2013 09:26   |
 Mikael Barbero
Messages: 55
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Hi Felix,
My reply below
Quote:In this case I need to create the composed adapter factory without using
the registry I guess?
Yes, or use the ReflectiveItemProviderAdapterFactory only
Quote:A related question:
The manual addition of generated factories in generated editor code is
just for speedup then?
fac = new ComposedAdapterFactory(theRegistry);
fac.add(new MyModelItemProviderFactory()) // <-- this here is not needed
?
The factory would find the item provider anyway through the registry..
A reason would be just to show you how to register other adapter factories that would not be registered into the registry through extension point... I don't see any other compelling reason other than performance... maybe Ed will give us more insights about this.
Best regards,
Mikael Barbero
Obeo
[Updated on: Thu, 26 September 2013 09:27] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
| Re: ComposedAdapterFactory delegates to generated factory for dynamic EObject [message #1117298 is a reply to message #1117247] |
Thu, 26 September 2013 09:32 |
Ed Merks
Messages: 33140
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Felix,
Comments below.
On 26/09/2013 10:39 AM, Felix Dorner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sorry for the length of this, but it's an easy read I promise :)
>
> I have a file resource that contains a serialized model with xmi
> schema locations, so I can load the model into a generated EMF editor
> and everything works fine.
>
> Now the issue is that for some of the elements in the resource there's
> generated packages, for others there's not (These are dynamic third
> party extensions) So the global registry knows some of the required
> EPackages, the missing ones are loaded via the xmlSchemaLocation
> mechanism. This leads then to a mix of dynamic EObjects and instances
> of my generated classes which doesn't work well together with
> inheritance. (See the other thread about dynamically extending a
> non-dynamic EClass a few weeks ago).
With multiple inheritance it can be impossible to dynamically satisfy
the need to implement more than one generated interface...
>
> So I create a custom editor and have it use a dumb package registry to
> avoid loading generated EPackages and force everthing to be loaded
> dynamically. (The resource also contains platform:/resource
> schemaLocations for the generated packages so this works fine).
I see.
>
> Now there's something wrong about ItemProviders: Even if the Objects
> are dynamic, the editor AdapterFactory uses the generated
> ItemProviderFactory, even if the object is dynamic. I expected it to
> use the reflective ItemProvider.
Hmmm...
>
> The key is in ComposedAdapterFactory.getFactoryForTypes:
> In the "factoryLoop" the result is the ReflectiveItemProviderFactory
> but then the adapterFactoryDescriptorRegistry kicks in and overwrites
> the result with the generated factory. That generated factory can't
> obviously provide an Adapter for dynamic objects.
>
> In this case I need to create the composed adapter factory without
> using the registry I guess?
Yes, that would help.
>
> A related question:
> The manual addition of generated factories in generated editor code is
> just for speedup then?
It more of a relic from before we registered the item providers, so yes,
it just makes it a little faster and more explicit.
>
> fac = new ComposedAdapterFactory(theRegistry);
> fac.add(new MyModelItemProviderFactory()) // <-- this here is not needed
>
> ?
> The factory would find the item provider anyway through the registry..
Yes.
Ed Merks
Professional Support: https://www.macromodeling.com/
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03505 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
