Stephen,
--- scolebourne@btopenworld.com wrote:
> > from: Victor Volle <victor.volle@gmxpro.net>
> > > It may be better to use Clazz and MetaClazz however. We should
> probably
> > > name either:
> > > a) following reflection:
> > > MetaClass/MetaField/MetaMethod
> > > AClass/AField/AMethod
> > >
> > > b) create out own names:
> > > MetaClazz/MetaProperty/MetaOperation
> > > Clazz/Property/Operation
> > >
> > > (a) might initially make more sense, but is a method bound to a
> specific
> > > object (a delegate) something that should be named AMethod?
> Operation
> > seems
> > > a better name. Similarly for Field vs Property.
> >
> > 1 Operation (because an operation me be abstract a method
> generally not)
+1
> > 1 Field
>
> Field is a problem because it clashes with java.lang.reflect.Field.
> It can't be Attribute, as thats the metadata, thus Property.
I would still keep Attribute on the list. After all, that's the word
used in UML, MOF, XMI and many other places. We can come up with a
different word for the additional metadata. Like MetaData.
> > BTW: in XMI operations and fields are subsumed under the name
> "feature".
"Feature" is also used the same way by java.beans
<snip/>
> > > > 4. What about inner classes?
> > > Do we care?
> > Probably not. But can we then have a
> > MetaModelFactory to plug in my own implementations for
> > MetaClass and so on. (I would need it for my code generator)
>
> We will need various pluggable factories. I haven't started to think
> about them yet.
Check out the code I submitted to this thread. Does it make sense?
<snip/>
- Dmitri
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
|