[udm-dev] udm_ns release

[Endre Magyari]

Zsolt,

	Good news - I finally did this, -o switch, BUT:

	To my understanding, backward compatibility means that the code written  
in previous UDM is valid and can be compiled.
	It doesn't mean, to my understanding, either of this:
	- .xml files generated by previous Uml2xml version (from udm) is  
compatible with udm_ns udm.exe
	- .xml UDM backend files (udmdom) saved by udm is compatible with udm_ns  
libraries.

	Since UML models are backward compatible, these can be regenerated by the  
udm_ns version of the tools.


Is that correct ?

Endre


	
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:08:20 -0500, Zsolt Kalmar  
<kalmar at isis.vanderbilt.edu> wrote:

> Endre,
>
>> I'm still seeking for a solution, either with "typedef", or with
> "using
>> namespace" directives which does not imply to change the whole
> generator,
>
> We tried a few tricks and they did not work because all the heritage
> source codes mix fully qualified names and "using namespace" directives
> and it causes ambiguity :
> namespace A
> {
>   namespace A
>   {
>     class C {};
>   }
>
>   typedef EndreFeleExtra::C C;
> }
>
> void main()
> {
>   using namespace A;
>   C c;
>   A::C c1;
> }
>
> However, if the extra namespace name differs from the package name like
> this:
>
> namespace A
> {
>   namespace EndreRagaszkodikHozza
>   {
>     class C {};
>   }
>
>   typedef EndreRagaszkodikHozza::C C;
> }
>
> void main()
> {
>   using namespace A;
>   C c;
>   A::C c1;
> }
>
> It seems working on this toy sample.
> But, I think that this type of solution makes the generated c++ API much
> messier, it's already hard to explain an udm genereated c++ API usage to
> an entry level c++ programmer.
>
>> but solves the issue of backward compatibility.
>> (pratically,  we would have two generators, one when there is only one
>> namespace in the diagram and an other when there are more)
>
> Don't you think it could be solved by rethinking udm at certain points
> and doing some code factoring?
>
> What are problems? Let me try to collect them:
>
> 1. Uml2Xml
> It generates an extra namespce into the xml representation . Why ?
>
> 2. C++ code generation
> At first glance it seems that source generation code everywhere assumes
> the diagram has namespaces and starts the code generation by iterating
> on them. Yes, it could introduce a lot change and conditional in the
> source code, but it is still doable.
>
> 3. Dom backend, xsd
> Probably it is the hardest part because the xsd looks different if it
> has a namespace. Some namespace treating functions need to be rewritten
> in UdmDom, too.
>
> 3. Uml c++ API usage
> Uml meta model is in "UML" namespace. Earlier it was not, so it should
> be remain as it was. I know that all udm source codes have been heavily
> modified in order to use "uml::uml::", but it should not be a reason for
> not doing the changes. Anyways, probably it is less effort than
> adjusting all the dependent applications like Great.
>
> 4. OCL?
> What else?
>
> Thanks,
> zsolt
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> udm-dev mailing list
> udm-dev at list.isis.vanderbilt.edu
> http://list.isis.vanderbilt.edu/mailman/listinfo/udm-dev