Hi Bob,
The well formedness rule - "There have to be at least two composite
substates in a concurrent composite state" - seems to be enforced by
the application rather then by crtics.
Yes, the WFR for 2 regions in a concurrent state is enforced.
This to make it transparent for the user. The user is kept unaware of the
regions as separate entities in the UML model.
BTW: Otherwise it would be very hard to implement: How would ArgoUML have to
react if there were only one? Think about the common user's usecase of
drawing regions.
We (the creator of concurrent states and me) decided on this strategy to
reach a solution that is user-friendly (and implementable).
It surprised my to find that the button to create a new Concurrent
Region on a Composite State actually creates 2 if there are currently
zero.
Yes, that is a consequence of this line of thought.
So should I make my job easier by removing the enforcement of this
rule or should I make this enforcement better by managing it in the
model subsystem?
Please, improve this enforcement.
This one is for usability.
The enforcement doesn't fully enforce as it currently allows zero
composites, is that good or bad? Possibly it's a balance between
enforcement and critics?
Err.. that must be a bug. How did you do that?
Please note that the former checkmark for concurrency on the composite state
proppanel is intentionally removed!
I see some simularity with swimlanes in an activity diagram, but there the
pool is not drawn first (and independently), so it differs.
Regards,
Michiel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Tarling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 3:03 AM
Subject: [argouml-dev] There have to be at least two composite substates in
a concurrent composite state.
The well formedness rule - "There have to be at least two composite
substates in a concurrent composite state" - seems to be enforced by
the application rather then by crtics.
As you probably know its my opinion that we should seek some balance
to enforce or hint different rules where it really aids the user to
get the design right first time.
So here is one to discuss.
It surprised my to find that the button to create a new Concurrent
Region on a Composite State actually creates 2 if there are currently
zero.
There is also the nasty hack to delete the remaining one if we get
down to just one (that probably won't work under all circumstances).
So should I make my job easier by removing the enforcement of this
rule or should I make this enforcement better by managing it in the
model subsystem?
The enforcement doesn't fully enforce as it currently allows zero
composites, is that good or bad? Possibly it's a balance between
enforcement and critics?
Bob.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.7/1409 - Release Date: 1/05/2008
8:39
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
