Re: [emf-dev] Odd looking generated code in Enums

[Eric Moffatt <emoffatt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Ed, I'm not exactly sure what the specifics are but I think that I've convinced him that sticking with the  currently generated code is likely the best idea. If you want I can track it down just for future reference...

Thanks for the quick reply,
Eric

Ed Merks ---04/23/2013 03:30:01 PM---Eric, Enumerator instances are expected to implement this interface, i.e.,

From:	Ed Merks <ed.merks@xxxxxxxxx>
To:	emf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx,
Date:	04/23/2013 03:30 PM
Subject:	Re: [emf-dev] Odd looking generated code in Enums
Sent by:	emf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

Eric,

Enumerator instances are expected to implement this interface, i.e., EEnumLiteral.getInstance returns such a value.   You can't remove it. We "hide" this from the public API in with this pattern. What exactly is the API tool's complaint?


On 23/04/2013 9:12 PM, Eric Moffatt wrote:

We've been getting our API ready and Mike Rennie picked up on the implementation of enums as having an apparently odd pattern;

The generated code 'implements Internal<x>' where <x> is the Feature name and 'Internal<x>' is  a package private interface that extends org.eclipse.emf.common.util.Enumerator.

Could someone explain why the pattern is there and what the possible consequences of removing it are (evidently it causes the API tooling to complain, not sure why) ?

Thanks,
Eric



_______________________________________________
emf-dev mailing list
emf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/emf-dev

_______________________________________________
emf-dev mailing list
emf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/emf-dev