Michiel said: > IMHO the Project is the only correct location of this function:
I'm not heavily against using Project but I saw providing this on the model interface as eliminating any chance of introducing cyclic references. But if there is no knowledge in the model interface implementation of which UML "model" model element is a profile or a user model then we may not have much choice than to use Project. > The content of the above mentioned function should be a case statement that > determines if the given object is e.g. a Fig, or a UML element, or something > else. That has a bad smell to me. At the very least we'd be introducing something there that we don't know what we need now. The fact that we pass model elements around as Object is probably really a design fault of our model interface. If it wasn't for that then the solution would be to overload method names to take different types or to make classes that we want to test for editable by having them implement some interface that defines isEditable() The latter I think would be better as I'd like to reduce knowledge of Fig through ArgoUML (with eclipse GEF/GMF in mind) Why would we not want Fig.isEditable()? Bob. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
