From: thowe <th...@sr...> - 2003-06-30 16:21:28
|
Hi, James had mentioned something along these lines to me and I wanted to kind of ping the list about it. The situation is, in RePast (http://repast.sourceforge.net) each of the features will be an "agent" and, as such, may have behaviours that are defined by a modeller. So the problem is that the features that are created by a datasource need to be those custom types. It seems (the casting issue aside), that if we could pass our custom FeatureFactory (which works using reflection) to the data sources, then we'd be able to create the appropriate objects. Then the modellers could use the agents in the way they want. Does this seem plausable? Or does anyone have any other thoughts on how to achieve this? Thanks, Tom |
From: Ian T. <ia...@ge...> - 2003-07-01 10:02:13
|
At 11:20 AM 30/06/2003 -0500, thowe wrote: >Hi, >James had mentioned something along these lines to me and I wanted to >kind of ping the list about it. > >The situation is, in RePast (http://repast.sourceforge.net) each of the >features will be an "agent" and, as such, may have behaviours that are >defined by a modeller. So the problem is that the features that are >created by a datasource need to be those custom types. It seems (the >casting issue aside), that if we could pass our custom FeatureFactory >(which works using reflection) to the data sources, then we'd be able to >create the appropriate objects. Then the modellers could use the agents >in the way they want. Does this seem plausable? Or does anyone have >any other thoughts on how to achieve this? It has to be said I haven't fully thought through the implications of this change but it sounds like a good idea, since there really isn't any other way we can allow custom features to be built. If not then the split of features from implementation was a bit of a waste of time. What sort of datasource would you be building from? I'm guessing some sort of XML. Ian Ian Turton, Director, Centre for Computational Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT http://www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/people/i.turton http://www.ccg.leeds.ac.uk http://www.geotools.org +44 (0) 113 343 3392 fax: +44 (0) 113 343 3308 |
From: Thomas H. <th...@tr...> - 2003-07-01 13:23:45
|
Actually, the data source would could be any of the standard datasources. Kind of the idea is that agents could be either built programmatically, and then saved into a geotools datasource, or loaded from a geotools datasource but instantiated as the proper agent class. -Tom On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 11:03:49AM +0100, Ian Turton wrote: > At 11:20 AM 30/06/2003 -0500, thowe wrote: > >Hi, > >James had mentioned something along these lines to me and I wanted to > >kind of ping the list about it. > > > >The situation is, in RePast (http://repast.sourceforge.net) each of the > >features will be an "agent" and, as such, may have behaviours that are > >defined by a modeller. So the problem is that the features that are > >created by a datasource need to be those custom types. It seems (the > >casting issue aside), that if we could pass our custom FeatureFactory > >(which works using reflection) to the data sources, then we'd be able to > >create the appropriate objects. Then the modellers could use the agents > >in the way they want. Does this seem plausable? Or does anyone have > >any other thoughts on how to achieve this? > > It has to be said I haven't fully thought through the implications of this > change but it sounds like a good idea, since there really isn't any other > way we can allow custom features to be built. If not then the split of > features from implementation was a bit of a waste of time. What sort of > datasource would you be building from? I'm guessing some sort of XML. > > Ian > > Ian Turton, Director, Centre for Computational Geography, University of > Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT > http://www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/people/i.turton http://www.ccg.leeds.ac.uk > http://www.geotools.org > +44 (0) 113 343 3392 fax: +44 (0) 113 343 3308 > |