Re: No preserve=yes mechanism for Java with Rose
From: David Postill (david_at_postill.org.uk)
Date: 08/23/04
- Next message: Topmind: "Re: Database type independence"
- Previous message: Charlie Calvert: "Re: UML Design and associations"
- In reply to: qazmlp: "Re: No preserve=yes mechanism for Java with Rose"
- Next in thread: H. S. Lahman: "Re: No preserve=yes mechanism for Java with Rose"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 07:51:34 GMT
In article <db9bbf31.0408221034.5a4a5f2d@posting.google.com>, on 22 Aug 2004 11:34:43 -0700,
qazmlp1209@rediffmail.com (qazmlp) wrote:
| qazmlp1209@rediffmail.com (qazmlp) wrote in message news:<db9bbf31.0408210134.6adf9397@posting.google.com>...
| > We have frequently used 'Code Generation' for C++ classes, a feature
| > that is available with Rational Rose.
| > If the 'Code Generation' is invoked again and again, the
| > entries/implementation that is already available inside the
| > 'preserve=yes' region, are preserved. But, it looks like, there is no
| > such mechanism available for Java.
| > Is that so? If no, kindly explain how preserve=yes can be achieved for
| > Java.
| Could somebody answer this? This is important for us as it(i.e.
| preserve=yes for Java) will help for our Code generation task in Java.
What's wrong with asking IBM?
<http://www-306.ibm.com/software/rational/support/>
<davidp />
-- David Postill
- Next message: Topmind: "Re: Database type independence"
- Previous message: Charlie Calvert: "Re: UML Design and associations"
- In reply to: qazmlp: "Re: No preserve=yes mechanism for Java with Rose"
- Next in thread: H. S. Lahman: "Re: No preserve=yes mechanism for Java with Rose"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|