|
|
| (11 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | [[Category:FAQ]] | + | #REDIRECT[[EMF_Compare/FAQ]] |
| − | | + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | =Users=
| + | |
| − | ====Which files should be compared via EMF Compare ?====
| + | |
| − | '''Q''' : My model is compared as a text-file, how can EMF compare know the files it should handle ?
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | '''A''' : EMF compare uses a content-type to know whether it should be used for comparison. This content-type will initially register itself against *.ecore and *.uml files. You may add your own extension using the <tt>Preferences view / Global / Content-types</tt> and adding your file extension in the "EMF Compare" content-type.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | [[Image:EMFComparePreferences-content-type.png]]
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ====How to force text comparison?====
| + | |
| − | '''Q''' : uml, ecore and emfdiff models are "locked" as model files in the aforementioned "EMF Compare" content-type. I want to compare two uml files as text, is there a way to do so?
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | '''A''' : You can force text comparison of those "locked" model files by adding their extension to the "text" content type in the same way as what is explained above.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ====EMF Compare compatibility?====
| + | |
| − | '''Q''' : Which Java/Eclipse versions can EMF Compare run on?
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | '''A''' : EMF Compare is built against JDK 1.5 and makes use of the features it introduced such as foreach and generics. It is therefore incompatible with a JDK < 1.5. We've also used EMF Compare successfully with both JDK 1.6 and JDK 1.7 early builds. As for Eclipse; as mentionned above, EMF Compare makes intensive use of JDK 1.5 features. These have been introduced with EMF 2.3 which isn't compatible with Eclipse < 3.3, EMF Compare is therefore only compatible with Eclipse 3.3 and higher.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | =Developpers=
| + | |
| − | ====How can I programatically add my model file extension in EMF Compare so that it is called automatically ? ====
| + | |
| − | '''Q''' : How can I programatically add my model file extension in EMF Compare so that it is called automatically ?
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | '''A''' : Using the "EMF Compare" content-type defined with EMF Compare, here is a sample from a plugin.xml:
| + | |
| − | <pre>
| + | |
| − | <extension
| + | |
| − | point="org.eclipse.core.contenttype.contentTypes">
| + | |
| − | <file-association
| + | |
| − | content-type="org.eclipse.emf.compare.ui.contenttype.ModelContentType"
| + | |
| − | file-extensions="uml13"
| + | |
| − | file-names="*"/>
| + | |
| − | </extension>
| + | |
| − | </pre>
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ====Is EMF Compare, as EMF, able to run outside of Eclipse ? ====
| + | |
| − | '''Q''' : Is EMF Compare able to compare "in-memory" objects, and can it be run without Eclipse ?
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | '''A''': Yes, [http://wiki.eclipse.org/images/2/23/Org.eclipse.emf.compare.example.standalone-I200710230727.zip here] is a Java project example doing just that.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ====What kind of "strategies" use EMF compare ? ====
| + | |
| − | '''Q''' : What kind of "strategies" use EMF compare ? On which research work is it based ?
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | '''A''' : The emf compare generic engine is based on several research work and on
| + | |
| − | experimentations. The paper being the most "near" the emf compare behavior
| + | |
| − | is probably "UMLDiff: An Algorithm for Object-OrientedDesign Differencing"
| + | |
| − | by Zhenchang Xing and Eleni Stroulia. Other reseach work have been used and
| + | |
| − | a lot of them use the same kind of general behavior:
| + | |
| − | A comparison in 2 phases, the first being the matching phase and the second
| + | |
| − | the differencing phase. The matching is done computing comparison metrics
| + | |
| − | and getting an "overall" rank of matching for two nodes while browsing both
| + | |
| − | versions of the model. These metrics may change considering the research
| + | |
| − | work, here in the generic engine we use 4 metrics :
| + | |
| − | *type similarity : analysing the metamodel element
| + | |
| − | *name similarity : looking for an attribute which have chances to be the
| + | |
| − | name and comparing it
| + | |
| − | *value similarity : analysing the whole attributes values
| + | |
| − | *relations similarity : using the relations the element has with others.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Using these 4 metrics the comparison engine provide good correctness (most
| + | |
| − | especially comparing models from DSM/DSL's metamodels) and efficiency when
| + | |
| − | comparing big models (~=100 000 elements).
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Once the matching phase is done, the matching model is browsed by the
| + | |
| − | differencing engine computing "added", "deleted" or updated elements from
| + | |
| − | that. If you save a comparison as an emfdiff model you'll be able to browse
| + | |
| − | the match and diff model and you'll get the similarity ranking for each
| + | |
| − | couple of elements.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | We're open to suggestion to enhance this generic behavior but we are also
| + | |
| − | open to other methods : we want this component to be a testbed for other
| + | |
| − | algorithms and comparison techniques, any Eclipse plugin may contribute its
| + | |
| − | own matching and differencing engine for generic or specific purpose and it
| + | |
| − | would be quite interesting to compare the results from different engines on
| + | |
| − | different models.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | These strategies will probably evolve in the next releases (see following question).
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ====What evolution should we expect on the global EMF compare strategies ? ====
| + | |
| − | '''Q''' : What evolution should we expect on the global EMF compare strategies ?
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | '''A''' : We are trying to get better results with generic comparison algorithm through other methods coming from the research world. An initiative about model transformation/weaving and comparison is taking place in Europe an you may expect that the EMF compare implementation will evolve toward these works.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | [http://www.model-transformation.org/ Model Transformation initiative]
| + | |
