| QVT Relations [message #71364] |
Wed, 09 January 2008 15:37  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: arazavi.swen.uwaterloo.ca
Hi everyone,
I was loosely tracking the news about QVT Relations (Declarative) that is
pending to be released under M2M project. I recently browsed the CVS server
and noticed that there is something under the relation folder but did not
seem to be a full implementation of the promissed Declarative QVT. I would
like to inquire about the state of this project.
Thanks
Ali
|
|
|
|
| Re: [QVTR] Re: QVT Relations [message #71611 is a reply to message #71479] |
Thu, 10 January 2008 09:47  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: arazavi.swen.uwaterloo.ca
Thanks Quentin,
"Quentin Glineur" <quentin.glineur@obeo.fr> wrote in message
news:fm4s5c$ef4$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Hi Ali,
>
> Can you remember to prefix QVT Relations related posts by [QVTR] as I
> did in the answer, thanks.
>
For sure, pardon me as I am new to the newsgroups of eclipse and not quite
familiar with the rules yet.
> You are right, some code has been commited on the CVS. Indeed, the
> implementation is not complete. We are using the CVS for development
> purpose to show transparency according to the Eclipse good practices.
>
> As you may have noticed, at this stage, we have focused on the compiler
> development with its definition in ACG. This version of the compiler
> should be functionnal for the checkonly mode but there still remain work
> for the enforce mode.
> We are currently working on an integration task (the launching of
> compilations from Java code). Once this step is done, we shall have the
> possibility to try some programmatic model preprocessing in order to
> bypass a compiler problem (ACG label handling). This step is mandatory
> for the enforce mode.
>
From what I understood, the implementation aims to map QVTR rules to ATL VM
bytecodes, in a similar way that QVTR->QVTCore mappings are specified in the
spec. There is a reference about something called Declarative QVT being
contributed by Compuware to the community in the M2M website. Is this
supposed to be a complement to that, or a parallel implementation. Any
chance you can tell me if the Declarative contribution will also include
Relations or it is only the Core part of the spec.
> Happy new year,
>
Best Regards
Happy new year to you too.
Ali
> Quentin GLINEUR
>
> Ali Razavi a
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [QVTR] Re: QVT Relations [message #71822 is a reply to message #71784] |
Mon, 14 January 2008 04:13 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: quentin.glineur.obeo.fr
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------000900040506020109040705
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hi, Ali
You are welcome. Indeed, QVT Relations meets your criteria from its
specification. Moreover, I agree with your point of view about choosing
a standard but please remember that QVT Relations specification is still
in beta version. As a consequence, my advice is to follow the the
evolution of the project as we shall discuss about the current active
development *and* the specification interpretation.
Any contribution about both is welcome :)
Regards,
Quentin GLINEUR
Ali Razavi a
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03239 seconds
Home