Re: [modeling-pmc] Contribution: template engine for GMF

[Ed Merks <merks@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Artem,

Being terminally impatient, I can certainly
relate to your desire to take action now and not wait around for a bunch
of administrative delays.  But that being said, the proper process
here really is to get this M2T proposal approved and then do this work
within the bounds of that project.   Also keep in mind that any use
of LPG by any project still needs to be legal approved even though OCL
is already approved to use it; of course this will go much faster since
the due diligence is already complete.  Could your activities take
place in a sandbox (i.e., not in public CVS) until this M2T thing is approved?
 Or could you simply reuse what's in GMT now until a syntax equivalent
version of it is available from M2T?   

Sven and Paul,

Do you guys have an ETA for when the
M2T proposal will be ready to submit to the EMO?  (The MDT proposal
has already been submitted.)


Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
905-413-3265  (t/l 969)

"Artem Tikhomirov" <Artem.Tikhomirov@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

08/22/2006 11:07 AM

Please respond to
PMC members mailing list <modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	<modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc	Sven Efftinge <sven@xxxxxxxxxxx>, voelter@xxxxxxx
Subject	[modeling-pmc] Contribution: template engine for GMF

Hello,

 I'm writing to inform the PMC about intent to provide significant code
contribution to one of Modeling projects, namely GMF. The contribution
is template engine, to be used along with JET engine, which is the only
template engine used in GMF now. 

 This new template engine is based on Xpand template engine which is part
of openArchitectureWare framework,  GMT project (http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/oaw).
It's stripped-down version of the framework, with pieces relevant and essential
only for code generation left. All dependencies from 3rd party libraries
were removed and the only one left - parser/grammar framework (ANTLR 2.7),
has been replaced with LPG library (one EMFT uses for OCL). Rest of the
original code is licensed under EPL.

 Xpand approach to code generation is different from JET's and proved to
be much more convenient for some tasks we face with GMF templates. Also,
one of initial plan items for GMF states support for flexible method of
generation (https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=114207), thus
new engine helps both GMF developers and GMF users to express their 'textual'
intentions with a language they feel most suitable.

 oAW framework and Xpand in particular are being considered as initial
contributions to Model to Text project. Also, M2T project might have support
to switch template engines. However, project set up and first deliveries
are points in distant future (months), and that just means "no"
for GMF 2.0. Using GMF-owned component allows us to start using new engine
soon. Syntax of the new engine is almost identical to that of original,
and there won't be a problem to switch to M2T deliveries once they are
out. Note, however, that proposed contribution in not kind of 'throw away'
stuff, pieces of it might find their way into M2T contributions (e.g. LPG
grammars, test cases, patches and improvements)

 Size of the contribution is about 10KLOC of handwritten code plus few
grammar definitions and LPG generated code. Contribution is thoroughly
covered with unit tests (200+). 

 I'll need PMC approval to proceed with contribution questionnaire (http://www.eclipse.org/legal/EclipseLegalProcessPoster.pdf
and http://www.eclipse.org/legal/ContributionQuestionnairePart1-v1.0.php).
Please let me know your opinion and feel free to ask any question about
the contribution. Thank you! 

Best wishes,
Artem Tikhomirov 
_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc