You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Some comments from our paper submission, which are worth considering:
Query Languages for program comprehesion is not a new topic and there are several interesting papers. Many commercial tools now integrate the work done earlier. I think comparison witth these tools is a critical missing piece of information from the paper. Here are some tools/approaches that authors would like to have a look at: CPPDepend [1], QL for source code analyis [2] and Moose[3]. Another point is that query language appears to be language-specific: final doesn't exist in C++, there are const and constexpr. So, may be a generic meta-model representing code entities and their qualifiers will be a better approach. Integrating syntax of all languages in the query language require too much work, IMO.
All the csar examples in the paper starts with the SELECT keyword. This suggests me that SELECT is redundant and not used, for me e.g. REFACTOR something TO something would be more logical than the current SELECT something REFACTOR something. It is also unclear where are the limitations of the language.
I think a more powerful solution would involve writing a query language which targets object-oriented languages in general, and then implementing that.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Some comments from our paper submission, which are worth considering:
I think a more powerful solution would involve writing a query language which targets object-oriented languages in general, and then implementing that.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: