Bert Verhees wrote: > >I understand more or less what you are saying about hard/soft parts, that is >the good thing of OpenEhr which you explain. Very good. But you still need to >store the soft parts, so you need a persistence layer. >This layer must "interface" with the kernel. > >I did not find information where that interface is and how to connect to it. >That is the first major problem I encountered, some guys in this list said: >Just put a database below >But when I ask how they explain that they are not programmers. >Makes me angry > > not too angry I hope! The persistence interface at the moment is not published as part of the specifications. It will be when current efforts in this area in the comunity have borne more fruit. But it is not difficult to design one - there needs to be a layer between the reference model classes and the database which converts the RM objects to a form most suitable for storage and querying on the database platform being used.
> >Eiffel maybe a good language, but I have, reasons to hate the Eiffel Studio. >I worked with many programming languages in the past, and I can get used to >Eiffel, it is not a hard language to learn. But the studio. > >It took hours to find out how to add an existing sourcefile to a project, the >buttons on the "New Class" dialog where grayed out. > > You just use an Ace file to indicate where the classes are. It's very simple. If you add a new class in one of those packages, the tool sees it automatically. >Ok, there must be some logic behind it. >Then I had to stop, and wanted to save the project. >There is no way of saving a project, and it does not prompt me to save when >closing the Studio. > > the project is always saved. >I thought, it must have been saved automatically, which I don't like, but >maybe there is logic behind it. > >Later I opened the project again, all my classes where gone, and I had to do >the whole thing again, toke me three hours extra. > >Arrrggghhhh. > > you've definitely done something strange there. Eiffel Studio is extremely simple: you tell it where the classes are with an Ace file, and you just start the tool. That's it. >I guess when one is used to this kind of things, one can work with it, and be >productive, but I can imagine it scares people away. > > well, you have to learn how to use the tool first. I'm sure you realise that no-one using Eiffel loses their work in this way. I sat down with Eclipse for the first time a few months ago, and I thought the way of getting around the packages was problematic. You couldn't hide version control directories. You have all this annoyance with CLASS_PATH. There is all this confusion (initially) between classes that are already on your disc versus ones that are created within the project. And you can't get inheritance-flattened views of anything, or interface views. But I read a fair bit of the book and other documentation, learned my way arond these seemingly strange things (normal to thousands of others of course) until I could drive the thing. I don't use MS Visual Studio often enough to be efficiennt at it, and it drives me crazy to be honest, but I can see that others are very productive, and I read often enough that it is an good IDE to believe it. Bert, there is always some learning involved. Clearly if you are losing 3 hours' of work you are not using the tool properly - there is huge online documentation (and documentation included in the tool help pages). - thomas
