Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [e4-dev] Modeled UI element names and SWT clash

Thanks for the quick input folks! Since I haven't seen anything against 'M' I'll change the model to the 'M'model today...

At this point we should all consider the model to be fairly plastic. If this change turns out to be bad for some reason then we can always find another approach. One of the major advantages of working in a model driven space is that cosmetic changes (and also most structural changes) are relatively easy to make and carry less risk of affecting working code. Currently we have so little code relying on the model specifics that we can make such changes easily. Now is the time to make changes; as we progress and more code is being written against the model this will become increasingly difficult (as it should) until it becomes the firmly set concrete we call 'API'.

What do you all think about holding a model review meeting, perhaps immediately after each e4 Milestone? This would give us all an opportunity to discuss not only the model's structure but also techniques for working with it. If you'd like to be part of this discussion get back to me and I'll add you to the list (Tom, Boris and Marcelo Paternostro are already on it but the more the merrier).

Thanks again,

Tom Schindl <tom.schindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

02/02/2009 07:57 AM

Please respond to
E4 Project developer mailing list <e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

E4 Project developer mailing list <e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Re: [e4-dev] Modeled UI element names and SWT clash

Hi Martin,

It's the other way round you *only* programm against M* and don't bother
anymore which SWT-Control you are modifing. MView e.g. is the
compareable to IViewPart in the current API.


Oberhuber, Martin schrieb:
> So, just for clarity of those not that intimately in touch with Modeled
> UI, what would a few examples be like?
> MMenu, MMenuItem, MToolTip, MWorkbenchWindow, ... ?
> What is the semantics of the M* variants compared to the original ones?
> Would anybody ever hand-write any code against the M* variants, or are
> these just generated anyways?
> Will they be public (Javadoc'd) API?
> Cheers,
> --
> *Martin Oberhuber*, Senior Member of Technical Staff, *Wind River*
> Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *From:* e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>     [mailto:e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Eric Moffatt
>     *Sent:* Freitag, 30. Jänner 2009 19:36
>     *To:* e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>     *Subject:* [e4-dev] Modeled UI element names and SWT clash
>     While working away on the compatibility I've (finally) reached the
>     point where Paul and I are starting to get the Menu/Toolbar story
>     together but we've hit a snag. The current model's elements such as
>     Menu, MenuItem...clash with the existing SWT classes, making it very
>     difficult to wotk on the code.
>     We'd like to change the model so that we don't have these clashes
>     and would happily take suggestions on what to do and/or if anyone
>     thinks that changing these is an issue.
>     After talking with Boris and Paul the best we've got so far is to
>     add a 'prefix' letter to all the model elements; 'M' for model, 'E'
>     to match EMF's types, 'E4'. <insert your facorite char here>
>     Which one is best?
>     Does anyone have another strategy?
>     Is this a good idea?
>     Onwards,
>     Eric
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> e4-dev mailing list
> e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

B e s t S o l u t i o n . a t                        EDV Systemhaus GmbH
tom schindl                               leiter softwareentwicklung/CSO
eduard-bodem-gasse 8/3    A-6020 innsbruck      phone    ++43 512 935834
e4-dev mailing list

Back to the top