|
|
Re: Composing Epsilon tools? [message #505582 is a reply to message #505564] |
Sat, 02 January 2010 10:54 |
Itamar Messages: 39 Registered: November 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Hi Dimitrios,
Thanks for the prompt response.
I looked at the example and it seems to fit what I need. However, I was thinking maybe of another approach for this:
Is it possible in Epsilon (and if not - is it worthy in your opinion?) to exploit the "Model!Type" syntax for composition?
For example, is it possible to write something along the following to implicitly invoke an ETL module?
-- in some EVL module, for example
...
context ETL("UML2Graph") ! Node {
...
}
The semantics is that instead of applying the constraint on instances of types in the model (e.g UML14!Class), it would be applied on instances of Graph!Node which are obtained by a transformation defined in the ETL module "UML2Graph".
Does such thing exist?
If not, do you think its worth to implement such a "hack"? How would I go about this? (suppose I create some class that implements IModel and executes the ETL module -- where would I "stitch" that into Epsilon's execution engine?)
[Updated on: Sat, 02 January 2010 12:40] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Composing Epsilon tools? [message #505592 is a reply to message #505582] |
Sat, 02 January 2010 15:55 |
Dimitrios Kolovos Messages: 1776 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Itamar,
There is nothing like this at the moment in Epsilon (and I must admit I
haven't come across anything similar elsewhere). What would be the
benefit of this approach vs. the workflow?
Cheers,
Dimitris
Itamar wrote:
> Hi Dimitrios,
>
> Thanks for the prompt response.
> I looked at the example and it seems to fit what I need. However, I was
> thinking maybe of another approach for this:
>
> Is it possible in Epsilon (and if not - is it worthy in your opinion?)
> to exploit the "Model!Type" syntax for composition?
> For example, is it possible to write something along the following to
> implicitly invoke an ETL module?
>
> -- in some EVL module, for example
> ..
> context ETL("UML2Graph",UML14!Class) ! Node {
> ...
> }
>
> The semantics is that instead of applying the constraint on instances of
> UML14!Class, it would be applied on instances of Graph!Node which are
> obtained by a transformation defined in the ETL module "UML2Graph".
>
> Does such thing exist?
> If not, do you think its worth to implement such a "hack"? How would I
> go about this? (suppose I create some class that implements IModel and
> executes the ETL module -- where would I "stitch" that into Epsilon's
> execution engine?)
--
Spread the word: http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/epsilon/spreadtheword
Follow Epsilon on Twitter: http://twitter.com/epsilonews
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Composing Epsilon tools? [message #584262 is a reply to message #584226] |
Sat, 02 January 2010 15:55 |
Dimitrios Kolovos Messages: 1776 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Itamar,
There is nothing like this at the moment in Epsilon (and I must admit I
haven't come across anything similar elsewhere). What would be the
benefit of this approach vs. the workflow?
Cheers,
Dimitris
Itamar wrote:
> Hi Dimitrios,
>
> Thanks for the prompt response.
> I looked at the example and it seems to fit what I need. However, I was
> thinking maybe of another approach for this:
>
> Is it possible in Epsilon (and if not - is it worthy in your opinion?)
> to exploit the "Model!Type" syntax for composition?
> For example, is it possible to write something along the following to
> implicitly invoke an ETL module?
>
> -- in some EVL module, for example
> ..
> context ETL("UML2Graph",UML14!Class) ! Node {
> ...
> }
>
> The semantics is that instead of applying the constraint on instances of
> UML14!Class, it would be applied on instances of Graph!Node which are
> obtained by a transformation defined in the ETL module "UML2Graph".
>
> Does such thing exist?
> If not, do you think its worth to implement such a "hack"? How would I
> go about this? (suppose I create some class that implements IModel and
> executes the ETL module -- where would I "stitch" that into Epsilon's
> execution engine?)
--
Spread the word: http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/epsilon/spreadtheword
Follow Epsilon on Twitter: http://twitter.com/epsilonews
|
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03955 seconds