Home » Modeling » GMF (Graphical Modeling Framework) » Alas, GMF still unusable after all these years...
|
| Re: Alas, GMF still unusable after all these years... [message #215311 is a reply to message #215284] |
Thu, 15 January 2009 14:02   |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: cayla_sha.gmx.net
Hello!
I don`t know what your exact problems are, but I had the impression that
a simple editor is made really fast with GMF.
I started with GMF in September and first I followed eagerly the
instructions of the Tutorials (like this:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/GMF_Tutorial or this:
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/library/os- ecl-gmf/) It
took me only a very short time to build my own working editor. It was
very simple, but it worked.
The problems came after this: No one needs such a simple editor. You can
use Visio or simliar for that. When someone writes a new editor, he
wants special features in it. And for that features the costs are
unequally superior, because then you have to take a look into the
generated code. This code is a huge project which you`ve never seen
before and you have not a minimal idea what it does. And there is nearly
no documentation for this code.
I work now for about 4 months with GMF and now I begin to understand
slowly whatever holds the code together in its inmost folds ;)
But this is a general problem of model-driven software-development.
To come back to the point of my statement:
A simple editor is made very fast with GMF. I had no problems with that.
And if the requirements of my project wouldn`d have shifted permanently,
I would`ve been faster done than in 5 months with my not-so-simple
editor. I think, this is still a reasonable amount of time for such a
project. I think, when I would´ve had to program the whole editor alone,
this would`ve taken MUCH longer. And I suppose it wouldn`t look so nice :)
Thanks GMF :D
Julia
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| Re: Alas, GMF still unusable after all these years... [message #215614 is a reply to message #215410] |
Fri, 16 January 2009 19:32 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: thomas.beyer.t-online.de
Hello Michael,
While reading your comments, I feel truly sorry for the GMF team and all
the users, that contribute to and put so much effort in a powerful
project like GMF.
Without disrespect, after 2+ years occupation with GMF and still not
being able to generate a diagram editor more complicated than A => B, I
would look for a different assignment than software development at all.
I agree, that GMF requires quiet some effort in the beginning, if your
new to Eclipse and/or GMF, in order to customize the default generated
editor to clients' specific needs. Well, it is very powerful and
therefor reasonably complex.
However, you CAN customize the code to your or your clients needs,
because its free and open!
You don't have to invest into cots-product's customization and support,
all you need is a smart engineer with some knowledge of java and modeling.
To my understanding, this provides the opportunity also for small
companies to adopt model driven software development and further this
sector.
I'm accompanying Eclipse since its code became open in 2001 and I am
fascinated year by year of what this community get's going.
After about one year of intensive dealing with GMF, I would say, I can
do pretty much anything I want with moderate effort.
Yes, I had hard times fully understanding concepts of GMF, however my
best assistant always was the community itself and reports of other
users. The way it works is hard to believe.
If the project doesn't adress the issues I require, I am doing it myself
and in most cases I find the time to share the solution with all the
others that might struggle at the same point.
I hope the contributors keep up the good work.
Regards
Thomas
Michael Moser schrieb:
> Dennis Doubleday wrote:
>> ...
>> Are you just venting, then?
>
> Yes, I was venting my frustration, that after 2+ years, I still can't
> automatically generate a diagram editor by feeding in a model that is
> more complicated than [A => B].
> After such a time I would expect, that if I run a wizard and I accept
> all the defaults, that I then at least get something that compiles and
> starts up.
> Whether it then is what I want is of course another question, but I
> would at least have a starting point...
>
> Michael
>
|
|
|
| Re: Alas, GMF still unusable after all these years... [message #215710 is a reply to message #215284] |
Sat, 17 January 2009 11:34 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: thugcee.gmail.com
Hi,
If we are complaining about GMF, there is one more thing to add: the
community. I have the strong impression that 95% of people on this news
group only asks questions. After receiving a solution for the problem
(usually from contributors) they even do not bother themselves to reply
if it worked. Lack of documentation is the problem of many OS projects
and the community should play an important role in solving it.
If every developer posted even small, but well described, discovered by
him/her example/hint/snippet to the wiki we would have very good
documentation.
greetings,
Seweryn Niemiec
|
|
|
| Re: Alas, GMF still unusable after all these years... [message #215724 is a reply to message #215710] |
Sat, 17 January 2009 12:58 |
 Ed Merks
Messages: 33137
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------060906040604020809080405
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Seweryn,
This reminds me of yet another old saying. When you point at the flaws
of others, look closely at your own hand and you'll notice there are
several fingers pointing back...
A few years back I recall sitting through a meeting where a group of
people were basically complaining (seemingly endlessly) about the lack
of EMF documentation. I let them go on for a very long while (or so it
seemed to me) and then finally asked a few very simple questions. What
you have you done to help? Have you ever added a question and answer to
the FAQ? It's a wiki, so you can. Have you ever written down the two
or three things that really would have helped you get started as a
beginner? Goodness knows I personally have an extremely poor
understanding of the beginner's perception of something I know extremely
well! Of course I already knew the answers to these questions and folks
did sheepishly agree that when there is an endless stream of free
goodness, there is little point in complaining that all the goodness
isn't as well documented as it should be. Do something about it, grin
and bear it, done' use it at all, but for goodness sake, leave the
tantrums for the children.
GMF's FAQ could use a little LTC from the community:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Graphical_Modeling_Framewo rk_FAQ
A GMF recipes page like the EMF one would be a nice way to share
experiences:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/EMF/Recipes
And of course anyone can write an informative article:
<http://www.eclipse.org/articles/>
http://www.eclipse.org/articles/
Thanks for helping to remind us that in a community we all share some
small obligation. Constructive civil behavior is the grease that makes
it all run smoothly...
Seweryn Niemiec wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If we are complaining about GMF, there is one more thing to add: the
> community. I have the strong impression that 95% of people on this
> news group only asks questions. After receiving a solution for the
> problem (usually from contributors) they even do not bother themselves
> to reply if it worked. Lack of documentation is the problem of many OS
> projects and the community should play an important role in solving it.
>
> If every developer posted even small, but well described, discovered
> by him/her example/hint/snippet to the wiki we would have very good
> documentation.
>
> greetings,
> Seweryn Niemiec
--------------060906040604020809080405
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Seweryn,<br>
<br>
This reminds me of yet another old saying. When you point at the flaws
of others, look closely at your own hand and you'll notice there are
several fingers pointing back...<br>
<br>
A few years back I recall sitting through a meeting where a group of
people were basically complaining (seemingly endlessly) about the lack
of EMF documentation. I let them go on for a very long while (or so it
seemed to me) and then finally asked a few very simple questions. What
you have you done to help? Have you ever added a question and answer
to the FAQ? It's a wiki, so you can. Have you ever written down the
two or three things that really would have helped you get started as a
beginner? Goodness knows I personally have an extremely poor
understanding of the beginner's perception of something I know
extremely well! Of course I already knew the answers to these
questions and folks did sheepishly agree that when there is an endless
stream of free goodness, there is little point in complaining that all
the goodness isn't as well documented as it should be. Do something
about it, grin and bear it, done' use it at all, but for goodness sake,
leave the tantrums for the children.<br>
<br>
GMF's FAQ could use a little LTC from the community:<br>
<blockquote><a
href=" http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Graphical_Modeling_Framewo rk_FAQ"> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Graphical_Modeling_Framewo rk_FAQ</a><br>
</blockquote>
A GMF recipes page like the EMF one would be a nice way to share
experiences:<br>
<blockquote><a href="http://wiki.eclipse.org/EMF/Recipes">http://wiki.eclipse.org/EMF/Recipes</a><br>
</blockquote>
And of course anyone can write an informative article:<a
href="http://www.eclipse.org/articles/"><br>
</a>
<blockquote><a href="http://www.eclipse.org/articles/">http://www.eclipse.org/articles/</a><br>
</blockquote>
Thanks for helping to remind us that in a community we all share some
small obligation. Constructive civil behavior is the grease that makes
it all run smoothly...<br>
<br>
<br>
Seweryn Niemiec wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:gksfnv$ufs$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite">Hi,
<br>
<br>
If we are complaining about GMF, there is one more thing to add: the
community. I have the strong impression that 95% of people on this news
group only asks questions. After receiving a solution for the problem
(usually from contributors) they even do not bother themselves to reply
if it worked. Lack of documentation is the problem of many OS projects
and the community should play an important role in solving it.
<br>
<br>
If every developer posted even small, but well described, discovered by
him/her example/hint/snippet to the wiki we would have very good
documentation.
<br>
<br>
greetings,
<br>
Seweryn Niemiec
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--------------060906040604020809080405--
Ed Merks
Professional Support: https://www.macromodeling.com/
|
|
| | |
| Re: Alas, GMF still unusable after all these years... [message #215852 is a reply to message #215731] |
Mon, 19 January 2009 18:24 |
Rennie allen
Messages: 16
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Seweryn Niemiec wrote:
> Hi Ed,
> Did you check my posts on this group and contribution do GMF wiki before
> accusing me of hypocrisy?
Seweryn,
Just to let you know, I did not understand Ed's post as accusing you of
hypocrisy. It was clear to me, that Ed was referring to the OP (just as
you were).
Anyway, I think most agree that GMF is cool, and that there could
certainly be better documentation, and that we could all do more to help.
If everyone committed to (over the next year) posting one single page
description of something that they found difficult to understand when
ramping up on GMF, then that might be a more productive exercise than
having these sorts of threads (and I understand that I am only echoing
your point :-)
Back to the OP, it certainly doesn't help the GMF community to make
unjustified assertions regarding the utility of GMF, since that is likely
to discourage someone attempting to overcome the the challenges presented
by the limited documentation, if it does not appear that there is a pot at
the end of the rainbow.
I commend the author of the "A Domain Specific Language Toolkit" for the
book, and I think that this will give most newbies what they need to get
their mouth around the first bite of GMF. If someone isn't prepared to
spend $38.00 for the book, then they are probably students/hobbyists who
relish the challenge presented by the sparse documentation :-)
|
|
| | |
| Re: Alas, GMF still unusable after all these years... [message #215969 is a reply to message #215867] |
Wed, 21 January 2009 08:41 |
Steve
Messages: 24
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Hello All,
To Criticize anything is very easy. But from my experience I would tell
this. I am in to GMF development for past 2 years and developed one robust
application for telecoms domain for my company.I agree at first, the
learning curve is very steep and still I am a newbie when it comes to
implementing certain features for the current project I am working on.The
people at GMF are very helpful in clearly explaining my doubts.Special
mention to Ed Merks and Alex Shatalin.
Before I had worked in an open source project named Gantt project, some
people will be knowing this project.There also I have seen critisisms like
this, What I need to ask most of the people is, How many will be willing
to work on an Open source software/framework development, who comes to
clear their doubts in this newsportal? May be some 20 maximum. So I would
say the GMF team is doing a very good job and the project is great. Please
don't expect to make a GMF application like we do using M$ Visual studio.
Nothing is perfect.If you feel a certain technology is not apt for your
requirement or you don't have time and patience don't go for it.Model
driven programming is hard indeed.Nothing is perfect in this world, Like
any other software application, GMF has also got great scope of
improvement.The contributors are doing a good job. Lack of tutorials I
agree, But the starting tutorials are very good from which any one can
build upon.A specific tutorial cannot be made using all the features,
because this framework is used in a wide variety of domains from simple
editor to Telecoms software to Real time programs that interacts with
mission critical elements.
By the way no offense meant to anyone.
Thanks,
Steve
|
|
| |
| Re: Alas, GMF still unusable after all these years... [message #218266 is a reply to message #218258] |
Wed, 11 February 2009 12:07 |
|
Lorenzo Bettini wrote:
> Ed Merks wrote:
>> Michael,
>>
>> Here you go:
>>
>> http://www.informit.com/store/product.aspx?isbn=0321580540
>>
>
> but that's the book on EMF... I think we were asking for a GMF book...
>
sorry, my mistake, I didn't know about this new book, and I thought it
was the EMF book...
does this book explain GMF in details?
thanks in advance
Lorenzo
--
Lorenzo Bettini, PhD in Computer Science, DI, Univ. Torino
ICQ# lbetto, 16080134 (GNU/Linux User # 158233)
HOME: http://www.lorenzobettini.it MUSIC: http://www.purplesucker.com
http://www.myspace.com/supertrouperabba
BLOGS: http://tronprog.blogspot.com http://longlivemusic.blogspot.com
http://www.gnu.org/software/src-highlite
http://www.gnu.org/software/gengetopt
http://www.gnu.org/software/gengen http://doublecpp.sourceforge.net
HOME: http://www.lorenzobettini.it
TDD Book: https://leanpub.com/tdd-buildautomation-ci
Xtext Book: https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/implementing-domain-specific-languages-xtext-and-xtend-second-edition
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Apr 19 15:40:40 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03879 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
