Book a Demo

Author Topic: Import of Java generic-collections  (Read 11481 times)

David Boaz

  • EA Novice
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Import of Java generic-collections
« on: September 26, 2008, 01:19:23 am »
Hi all,

I have a large set of existing Java classes. When trying to import the Java code to EA, it appears that all generic-collections were not recognized as associations in EA.
For example, when importing:
class B{}
class A{
  private List<B> items;
}

EA will not create a 1:* association from A to B.

This question is related to the discussion in http://www.sparxsystems.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1219245068/3#3

The question is how to configure EA to understand these collections. If this feature is not supported, then can someone please propose a workaround?

Thanks for the help, David

«Midnight»

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 5651
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • That nice Mister Grey
    • View Profile
Re: Import of Java generic-collections
« Reply #1 on: September 26, 2008, 07:38:59 am »
Try importing the Java libraries. Use the Import Binary Module feature of EA. Then EA might recognize the appropriate classes...

At least I think so. There's more in the EA help, now that you know what to look for. There are also several threads in the forum that have dealt with this sort of stuff.
No, you can't have it!

Eve

  • EA Administrator
  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 8087
  • Karma: +118/-20
    • View Profile
Re: Import of Java generic-collections
« Reply #2 on: September 26, 2008, 08:28:11 am »
Read my answer on the referenced thread.

To summarize it, EA will not create an association from a generic collection.  This is something we will add in time.

David Boaz

  • EA Novice
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Import of Java generic-collections
« Reply #3 on: October 23, 2008, 11:55:22 pm »
Hi again,

Will it be possible to solve (or, at least work-around) the problem described above using a transformation?
Can someone give us a hint how to define such a transformation?

Thanks, David