I have a package with a lot of classes, and I want to organize them. I would happily split them into several packages based on my "category" of class, but unfortunately most of them are parts of a united system with package-level visibility.
Is there any way to create some sort of "subfolders" inside a package in Eclipse just to visually divide files in groups?
Try to use working sets. This won't organize your classes, but help you to display just you need at a moment.
Related
I am creating a database library for Altium.
For example, I have several NPN transistors in the same SOT-23-3 package, but they have different pinouts: collectors and emitters are swapped.
In Celestial Altium Library different footprints are used for different manufacturers, in which there are already different pinouts. But because of this, there are several identical footprints (excluding pinouts).
What should I do in such a case? Create a new footprint or symbol? Or maybe there is a way to set the mapping in the database itself?
We need to create a booking system that allows rape victims to book sessions with a counsellor (who is a volunteer therefore is not on duty 24/7) online. The organisation used to do the booking process over the phone, writing down important information.
This is the package diagram I created for a project. I am not sure: am I allowed to just use the packages as entities for the class diagram?
A package is a tool to structure models by grouping somehow related pieces into namespaces.
It is not unusual to recognize a decomposition that coincides somehow with larger components (e.g. Client, Application and Data). But it is not correct to use packages as a substitute for a class. It may even look confusing.
It is not a problem to keep enclosing or nested packages such as Booking system in a class diagram. But you should use a proper class box for classes. You would then be able to show not only the properties but also the operations in a different compartment. Last but not least, you could be more precise in the relationships between classes, considering that packages are only related via dependencies and some special package operations, whereas classes can be related also with associations, inheritance, etc..
For example, your diagram tells only that Booking is dependent on Client. And this means the content of one package needs to know about the other packages. But in reality Client and Booking should be associated i.e. an instance of Client would be related for a longer time to some specific instances of Booking. In this case, you'd expect that you could easily navigate from the one to the other. Associations also allow to specify multiplicity, e.g. that one client could have 1 or more bookings, but each booking would be for only one client.
Other remarks, unrelated to the question:
Your comment box suggests that you try to explain the purpose of the system, perhaps for some stakeholders. You may therefore consider using a use-case diagram to show the big picture with the different actors and the goals they want to achieve with the system.
In a class box, you could add an «Entity» stereotype above the name of the class. Entities are domain classes that matter to the users.
Data storage system seems not to fit in the diagram: it's not really an entity. Perhaps it's a class, a component or a package, but not really an entity.
We are interested in generating a class diagram where the classes are grouped in blocks of namespaces.
Our goal is an overview of our projects domain landsacpe.
Doxygen has the information about namespaces and classes.
We would like to know if there allready is a way to generate this kind of diagram or if someone can give us a jumpstart on how/where it could be integrated?
Selecting a subset of namespaces or taged classes would be nice.
We have multiple model projects using codefluent (M1 and M2).
Is it possible to have one model project (say M1) using type reference of another model project (M2) ?
I tried adding project reference or existing item in model but none of them worked.
The import feature doesn't seem to be the way to go either
Shall I consider having only one model project for my solution ?
Thanks for your answer,
I think you want to create a relationship between entities of both models.
If so, it's easier to have only one model. If you create multiple models because of their sizes, you may be interested in parts and surfaces to split it (blog post about surfaces).
If you want to have multiple models, I think it's possible to create relationships between entities (but I didn't test it). You need to create the entity in both model and play with the producer specific attribute enabled (cfps:enabled, cfom:enabled, etc.). Unless you really want to do complex things, I think you may stick to one model.
I have an Ecore model saved to file.
What I want to do is to modify the Ecore model (add elements, supertypes, attributs, delete attributes...)
But I don't want to do it by hand, I want a script / M2M transformation.
What language, tool would you use ?
What you want is transform your Ecore model into another Ecore model. You should have a look at the model transformation projects of the Eclipse Foundation. I would recommend ATL among those projects as it's easy to master for your need (you do not seems to need very complex transformations). If you need a really simple transformation, I'll suggest doing it directly in Java as it may be easier for your to integrate it in your workflow.
Full disclosure: I work for one of the company contributing to ATL.
Can you be more precise please?
I understood you want to modify your source model, however I suppose you want to do it accordingly to some rules. Is that true? Can you exemplify these rules?
That said, I would recommend you to start with Epsilon. It is a powerful language which allows you to define a variety of model-to-model and model-to-text transformations.
Since you're writing a model-to-model transform you should use Java as nothing beats Java for the sorts of navigations, iterations and fine-grained access that you'll need. If you wanted to generate code from the model I'd suggest one of the templating languages, however.