Better name for generic classes
mpashkovskiy opened this issue · comments
Names like List`1 causes messy visualisations like following:
Is it possible to generatenames like List`[FieldName] (eg List`AuditRecords)? Or maybe there is another way to generate better diagrams?
I think that in class A, all fields and properties of type IEnumerable<B> should be rendered with an association between A and B.
The pain is that the parser doesn't know that List<B> implements IEnumerable<B>. We need to compile the source code and then we could use reflection to inspect types and inheritance.
ClassDiagramGenerator inherits from CSharpSyntaxWalker but I think that is not enough to be able to generate a useful class diagram with right associations.
Worked on it on my fork, proposition of pull request incoming
Another suggestion to solve these messy references: Could we have an option to specify classes (e.g. all built-in .NET classes or a list) that are not referenced as a separate element? Properties/members of this types would then be displayed in the referencing class, like
AuditRecords: List<AuditRecord> <<get>> <<set>>
This does not change displaying generic type names, but diagrams with List and Dictionary become a lot cleaner. Besides, we also have the messy reference problem with the built-in DateTime, which is not a generic class.