-
Key: KERML-127
-
Status: open
-
Source: Model Driven Solutions ( Mr. Ed Seidewitz)
-
Summary:
There is currently no constraint that the typing of a subsetting feature conform to the typing of the subsetted feature. For example, the following is currently considered valid:
classifier A; classifier B; feature x : A; feature y : B subsets x;
even if there is no specialization relationship between A and B. Currently, what happens is that y picks up the additions the additional type A due to the subsetting. So the above declaration for y is essentially equivalent to
feature y: B, A subsets x;
Now, unless A and B are declared as disjoint, it is possible that there are instances classified by both A and B, so that this joint typing of y isn't vacuous. Nevertheless, it seems more useful, for static type checking, to presume disjointness and to disallow the above subsetting unless B can be statically determined to specialize A.
This is relevant, in particular, for connectors, in which the related features are determined using reference subsetting. Consider the following:
assoc C { end a: A; end b: B; } feature a1: A; feature b1: B; connector c: C from a ::> b1 to b ::> a1;
Because of the above, this is currently allowed. But, as a result, this really seems to make the typing of association ends pretty much useless for connectors.
-
Reported: KerML 1.0b1 — Tue, 1 Aug 2023 15:32 GMT
-
Updated: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 23:30 GMT
KERML — Add validateSubsettingTypeConformance constraint
- Key: KERML-127
- OMG Task Force: Kernel Modeling Language (KerML) 1.0 FTF