I second that.
Maybe "imports" or "importedModules" instead of "prerequisites", to get
a connection to "exports".

Daniel

Andreas Raab <Andreas.Raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> Stephane,
> 
> > Now during your analysis (a tool is missing here) you have to 
> > distinguish between the good and the bad references. The good
> > references are the references to classes that are in your modules
> > prerequisite chain.
> > 
> > I think that we should be able to ask a module its prereq 
> > modules. This should be somewhere but I do not had the time
> > to find it.
> 
> I think you got caught by some odd naming conventions. The class comment
> in Module (yes there is one ;-) says:
> 
> "Dependencies
> The modules in an image can be regarded as nodes in a module graph,
> where each module has links (edges) to the modules it depends on; these
> are its ''neighbor modules''. A module can access definitions in these
> modules, and they will be loaded as prerequisites of this module. "
> 
> Thus the "neighbor modules" are the prerequisites. I got caught by that
> too (as well as by "definedNames" and "exportedNames" which hold the
> actual objects not just their names as I initially assumed). Perhaps we
> should rename these variables accordingly (e.g., "prerequisites",
> "definitions" and "exports").
> 
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas