From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,99f33f51845a7793 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-13 13:05:02 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!dispose.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!pogner.demon.co.uk!zap!not-for-mail From: Simon Wright Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: 'withing' problem Date: 13 Nov 2001 07:01:15 +0000 Organization: Pushface Message-ID: References: <3be27344$0$227$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net> <3BE42900.7590E899@adaworks.com> <3be65f4c$0$237$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98 X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1005685480 nnrp-14:20493 NO-IDENT pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98 X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 Nov 2001 07:01:15 GMT X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16449 Date: 2001-11-13T07:01:15+00:00 List-Id: "Matthew Heaney" writes: > "Simon Wright" wrote in message > news:x7vu1w2bil4.fsf@smaug.pushface.org... > > "Matthew Heaney" writes: > > I think the thing I find most awkward is the asymmetry here. > > If you have a cycle, you only have to break the cycle in one place. I > arbitrarily picked the Patient type. > > > > When you > > look at a model (UML I mean, of course), how are you going to know > > which way to jump? > > I don't understand your question. I'm presuming that most of us start from some sort of visual model: +--------------------+ +-------------------+ | | 1 0..n | | | Doctor |----------------------------| Patient | | | treats | | +--------------------+ +-------------------+ I think that people looking at this model, perhaps for the purpose of maintaining code written to implement it, need to have a very clear idea of how the code will look. It's a Bad Thing if you need to make arbitrary decisions to break cycles. What would be even worse would be to have a framework code generator that applied heuristics to break cycles. I imagine that it wouldn't take much for such heuristics to make the opposite decision for minor model changes (remember that very few models are as simple as this one!)