John,
It would not take that much effort (to make a converter). In fact -- I have
already written much of it (3 years ago during a summer vacation in
Connecticut).
(OK -- I looked at the code -- *** it is over 4 years ago)
I called my system (Rubedy) -- as I was taking arxml files and generating
Ruby On Rails code.
I created:
Migrations (table definitions)
Controllers (filters)
I ignored the UI side (including active links) -- as to me the whole thing
was about learning Ruby/Rails…
So - I could take any arxml file and re-generate the system in Ruby On
Rails -- it was a fun project.
johnsmac:Main jdsundberg$ ls -al
total 88
drwxr-xr-x 14 jdsundberg jdsundberg 476 Jan 12 12:32 .
drwxr-xr-x 18 jdsundberg jdsundberg 612 Jan 3 2011 ..
-rwxr--r--@ 1 jdsundberg jdsundberg 440 Jul 20 2007 HISTORY
-rw-r--r--@ 1 jdsundberg jdsundberg 1994 Jul 10 2007 README
-rw-r--r--@ 1 jdsundberg jdsundberg 4221 May 10 2008 TODO
-rwx------@ 1 jdsundberg jdsundberg 1296 Feb 27 2009 breakUpXML.rb
-rwx------@ 1 jdsundberg jdsundberg 1067 Jun 24 2007 buildFieldList.rb
-rwx------@ 1 jdsundberg jdsundberg 947 Jun 25 2007 getAllFieldNames.rb
drwxr-xr-x 19 jdsundberg jdsundberg 646 Sep 25 2007 lib
-rwx------@ 1 jdsundberg jdsundberg 5284 Feb 16 2009 parseXML.rb
-rw-r--r--@ 1 jdsundberg jdsundberg 192 Jun 3 2007 rakefile.rb
-rw-r--r-- 1 jdsundberg jdsundberg 2130 Jan 12 12:32 rubedy_listing
drwxr-xr-x 3 jdsundberg jdsundberg 102 Jul 17 2007 skel
drwxr-xr-x 12 jdsundberg jdsundberg 408 Aug 2 2007 test
Here is the contents of the filter qualification code:
$:.unshift(File.dirname(__FILE__) + "/../")
require 'rexml/document'
require 'value_type'
module Remedy
module Filters
class QualificationTree
# a QualificationTree - will either have a value/valueType
# or an operation with a left operand an a right operand
attr_reader :valueType, :value, :operation, :left, :right
def initialize(qual)
if (qual.nil?) then
# FIXME -- I think this can be deleted
# This appears to exist only when noQualification exists for a
filter
# I try to init a qualificationTree from Filter when writing
out the
# if statement of the filter
return ""
end
if qual.elements[1].name == "and" then
@operation = "and"
@left = QualificationTree.new(qual.elements[1].elements[1])
@right = QualificationTree.new(qual.elements[1].elements[2])
return
end
if qual.elements[1].name == "or" then
@operation = "or"
@left = QualificationTree.new(qual.elements[1].elements[1])
@right = QualificationTree.new(qual.elements[1].elements[2])
return
end
if qual.elements[1].name == "relationalOperation" then
@operation = qual.elements[1].elements[1].text
@left = QualificationTree.new(qual.elements[1].elements[2])
@right = QualificationTree.new(qual.elements[1].elements[3])
return
end
if qual.elements[1].name == "arithmeticOperation" then
@operation = qual.elements[1].elements[1].text
@left = QualificationTree.new(qual.elements[1].elements[2])
@right = QualificationTree.new(qual.elements[1].elements[3])
return
end
if qual.elements[1].name == "transactionValueFieldID" then
@valueType = "transactionValueFieldID"
@value = qual.elements[1].text
return
end
if qual.elements[1].name == "currentValueFieldID" then
@valueType = "currentValueFieldID"
@value = qual.elements[1].text
return
end
if qual.elements[1].name == "databaseValueFieldID" then
@valueType = "databaseValueFieldID"
@value = qual.elements[1].text
return
end
if qual.elements[1].name == "value" then
@valueType = qual.elements[1].elements[1].name
@value = qual.elements[1].elements[1].text
return
end
puts "ERROR: QualificationTree#initialize not prepared to handle
'#{qual.elements[1].name}'"
end
# include the formname so we can translate the qualification to be
# usable names vs numbers
def to_model(formname)
if (@valueType.nil? && @operation.nil?) then
return "true"
end
# Handle the valueTypes
if ([email protected]?) then
return Remedy::ValueType.to_ruby(@valueType, @value, formname)
end
# Handle the operations
if (@operation == "and") then
return ("(#{@left.to_model(formname)} &&
#{@right.to_model(formname)})")
end
if (@operation == "or") then
return ("(#{@left.to_model(formname)} or
#{@right.to_model(formname)})")
end
if (@operation == "equal") then
return ("(#{@left.to_model(formname)} ==
#{@right.to_model(formname)})")
end
if (@operation == "less") then
return ("(#{@left.to_model(formname)} !=
#{@right.to_model(formname)})")
end
if (@operation == "like") then
return ("(#{@left.to_model(formname)} like
#{@right.to_model(formname)})") # FIXME -- this is not legal ruby
end
if (@operation == "greater") then
return ("(#{@left.to_model(formname)} >
#{@right.to_model(formname)})")
end
if (@operation == "notEqual") then
return ("(#{@left.to_model(formname)} !=
#{@right.to_model(formname)})")
end
if (@operation == "greaterEqual") then
return ("(#{@left.to_model(formname)} >=
#{@right.to_model(formname)})")
end
if (@operation == "add") then
return ("(#{@left.to_model(formname)} +
#{@right.to_model(formname)})")
end
if (@operation == "multiply") then
return ("(#{@left.to_model(formname)} *
#{@right.to_model(formname)})")
end
# we should never get here - unless new valueTypes have been
discovered
puts "ERROR: QualificationTree#to_model not prepared to handle
'#{@operation}'"
end
end
end # Filters
end # Remedy
-John
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:00 AM, John Baker <[email protected]
> wrote:
> Gavin: I was surprised you admitted to not being a very good developer
> given your experience with XPath, which I would argue isn't on page 1, 2, 3
> or 4 of the "How to script" guide.
>
> I return to my original argument: I don't think it's beyond the wit of the
> majority of people to fiddle with script, and if Developer Studio stored
> workflow in a file (per form), then it would take AR System to a new level.
> One can still point and click, but they could start to do far more
> interesting stuff too.
>
> Everything's a Java plugin these days, and invoking Java plugins for
> simple tasks results in a slower AR System. And let's not forget the "Run
> process" functionality, which has acted like a pseudo scripting input for
> as long as I can remember, ie if there's no workflow for it, we'll use a
> run process event. How long is the list of run process events these days?
>
> With the point and click interface being slowly overtaken by Java plugins,
> random run process events, C (eugh) plugins, etc., isn't it time everything
> was cleaned up in favour of a modern, standard, widely used scripting
> language to represent workflow? And I state very clearly, the point and
> click interface would be used to drive this workflow, removing no existing
> functionality.
>
> For those who fancy a trip back in time, I recall Mid Tier 5 and 6.0 had a
> workflow engine built into it. The workflow was sent to the browser in
> structures, and a Javascript workflow engine "ran" it. This was very, very
> slow. So in 6.3, a bright spark decided to replace it with the simple
> principal of writing out workflow as Javascript, and it got a lot faster.
> At that point, the schema tables could have begun retirement.
>
> I wonder how much money BMC has spent trying to re-invent the wheel with
> overlays, when a scripted solution would have been cheaper and brought many
> benefits - not least an end to the 30 minute start up times for ITSM 7.6.04.
>
> If BMC want to give JSS a pile of money, we'd be happy to write it for
> them :-)
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
>
--
John David Sundberg
235 East 6th Street, Suite 400B
St. Paul, MN 55101
(651) 556-0930-work
(651) 247-6766-cell
(651) 695-8577-fax
[email protected]
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
