Jump to content

Comparison of code generation tools

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Caracho (talk | contribs) at 19:02, 2 April 2009 (→Creation by OPV (Caracho): I had to restart computer (unfinished)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This article compares variable metamodel code generation. Please exclude, fixed metamodel code generation as UML tools (see List of UML tools).

Name Creator OS First public release Latest stable version Software license Open source
Acceleo Obeo cross-platform (Java / Eclipse) 2006-03 2.5.1 EPL Yes
JCodeBox cross-platform (Java) Propietary No

Technical

Name Implementation Language Active; Passive [1] Model[2] Typical input Other input Typical output
JCodeBox Java ? Tier Java Java (Full Web Application)
Acceleo Java ? Tier UML DSM, UML2, UML14, UML13, XML/XSD, EMF Any
XDocLet ? ? Munger JavaDoc ? EJB support beans
Pro*C C? ? Inline SQL in C ? C

References

  1. ^ "Active generators build code that you should not modify or should only modify in specifically marked sections which are held safe during a re-generation cycle... Passive generators build code once and then it’s up to you to maintain the code long-run. "
  2. ^ Type based on input: Code munger, Inline code expander, Mixed code generator, Partial class generator, Tier generator
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparison_of_code_generation_tools&oldid=281343142"