| How to create a prefix like fXxx or _xxx for fields in generated models? [message #421500] |
Thu, 07 August 2008 22:47  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
is there a way to specify a prefix or the name for the field generated?
Example (using emfatic syntax):
class MyClass {
attr int fooBar;
}
I want to specify the name of the fooBar
field to be _fooBar or fFooBar. Instead of
protected int fooBar = FOO_BAR_EDEFAULT;
I want
protected int _fooBar = FOO_BAR_EDEFAULT;
or
protected int fFooBar = FOO_BAR_EDEFAULT;
or
protected int fooBar_ = FOO_BAR_EDEFAULT;
Is thre a magic annotation like the @GenModel(documentation="my doc")
(https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=152481#c1)?
class MyClass {
@GenModel(filedName="fFooBar") // would be nice :-)
attr int fooBar;
}
Why? Because often without the escape it is all to easy
to accidentally assign to the fooBar variable in "@generated NO"
methods.
Another option I would like is to make members private to the
class.....
Michael
--
Michael Scharf
Wind River Systems GmbH
http://www.WindRiver.com
http://MichaelScharf.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
| Re: How to create a prefix like fXxx or _xxx for fields in generated models? [message #421552 is a reply to message #421519] |
Fri, 08 August 2008 22:23  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Ed,
thanks for the quick reply. I was hoping, that there is
already a magic annotation that does the trick.
Maybe, I'll do a patch when it annoys me too much...
Michael
> Michael,
>
> Comments below.
>
>
> Michael Scharf wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> is there a way to specify a prefix or the name for the field generated?
> No the field name is computed directly from the feature name.
>>
>> Example (using emfatic syntax):
>>
>> class MyClass {
>> attr int fooBar;
>> }
>>
>> I want to specify the name of the fooBar
>> field to be _fooBar or fFooBar. Instead of
>> protected int fooBar = FOO_BAR_EDEFAULT;
>> I want
>> protected int _fooBar = FOO_BAR_EDEFAULT;
>> or
>> protected int fFooBar = FOO_BAR_EDEFAULT;
>> or
>> protected int fooBar_ = FOO_BAR_EDEFAULT;
>>
>> Is thre a magic annotation like the @GenModel(documentation="my doc")
>> (https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=152481#c1)?
>>
>> class MyClass {
>> @GenModel(filedName="fFooBar") // would be nice :-)
>> attr int fooBar;
>> }
>>
>>
>> Why? Because often without the escape it is all to easy
>> to accidentally assign to the fooBar variable in "@generated NO"
>> methods.
> I'm not keen on adding yet more complexity because you have a tendency
> to assign variables without considering if that's a good idea.
>>
>> Another option I would like is to make members private to the
>> class.....
> You'd still have the same problem in that class then. Some of the
> generation patterns require access to the field in derived classes.
>
> Feature requests arrive faster than the shrinking team can address them
> so I'm not going to suggest a feature request for this, but if you feel
> strongly about it, a patch to implement it will be considered.
>>
>> Michael
--
Michael Scharf
Wind River Systems GmbH
http://www.WindRiver.com
http://MichaelScharf.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.06708 seconds
Home