-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Refactoring and documentation based on "Universal" common interfaces #17
Comments
Both BHoM/BHoM_Engine#1645 and BHoM/BHoM_Engine#2671 are related and focus on the same issue of migrating stuff from I am intending to close these out in sprint 1 of the 5.1 milestone in the new year. The following steps will be undertaken:
There are some non-installer repos which should be updated at the same time, namely around the zero-code tools. @adecler could you add a list of the repos you'd like to see updated at the same time for continuity to one of the linked issues (to avoid adding too much more to this issue than is necessary for this issue) (or as an edit to this comment for me)? Hopefully that all makes sense. As I say, timeline is sprint 1 of 5.1 milestone, probably towards the end of the first week owing to the copyright updates which will happen first and would cause conflicts. |
Thanks @FraserGreenroyd @adecler N.B. I have updated the diagram in this issue above to latest iteration. Equally see updated comment above about any code remaining in current Reflection oM/Engine after migration. What will be left and should we rename the Engine to help clarify its purpose? Ideas welcome. |
Agree with 95% of all the suggestions for changes in this issue. Some few things I slightly question are:
Personally, I want to get rid of any reference to any Can understand the reasoning behind getting it out of the Base_oM, even if I kind of like to have it there myself, but if it needs to be moved I would argue a better fit for it would be the Spatial_Engine, for the same reasons as discussed in the linked BHoM issue.
This is being used be analytics and Library, and more to come, and wonder if it is not best placed in the base oM? I personally at least have a hard time coming up with a better place for it. Know the whole statement starts with review, so might be the conclusion of that review. 😄 |
Broken rules:
There are some keys interfaces that drive everything, defining the formal structure, dependency and organization of the BHoM.
We need to push a reorganization of their arrangement, tweak some conventions and namings, and relocate appropriately certain Engine methods that use/depend on them.
Suggestions to restore compliance:
WIP diagram:
Engines
BHoM_Engine
Analytical_Engine-Graphics_Engine
Results_Engine
The Results engine should be deleted, as it currently depends on Structure_oM and Analytical_oM and Graphic_oM and its categorization is not meaningful.
MapResults
(to be renamedMappedResult
).Reflection_Engine
Any objects/methods left obviously is code that is needed as part of the Framework for Adapters, UIs etc. and is distinct from the already existing Programming namespace that is "Programming as a discipline". i.e. creating Programming representation of a concept much like a Structural or Acoustics representation say
Object models
Base_oM
Analytical_oM
Graphical_oM
Reflection_oM / Programming_oM / Data_oM
Review / action the historic issue: Global: Try to remove the dependency between the BHoM engine and the Reflection Engine BHoM_Engine#1645. And see above
Consider grouping Programming_oM with "Disciplines namespaces"; consider renaming to something more discipline-y (e.g. Scripting_oM)
Create a Library_oM and move there the Data, source from the Data_oM
Move out as much stuff as possible from the Data_oM to appropriate oMs: Requests -> Analytical_oM, etc. (see if dependency chain can be respected)
EDIT: Updated the diagram to latest WIP and point around Reflection namespace in light of updated diagram
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: