There is a lot of power to Roassal. It does arrows on directed edges.
You can define your own shapes. Look at the tree layout examples. I
would suggest looking mainly at the "raw" Roassal examples rather than
the Mondrian ones. They give you more control.
cheers -ben
Norbert Hartl wrote:
Hi Stephan,
Am 04.04.2013 um 10:48 schrieb Stephan Eggermont <[email protected]>:
Hi Norbert,
Could you get some inspiration from the PetitParser browser?
What would you need more? Roassal could do with some
more shapes, but is pretty good for something like that.
with PetitParser browser you mean the PetitParser UI? And what aspect you are referring to? The linked node diagram of productions?
Can you elaborate on the capabilities of Roassal? I had a look at Roassal. As far as I understand it is suited for larger distributions of rather homogenous shapes. I know you can choose different shapes for different views. But my case would be more a "constructing" of an diagram image.
Ok, the real plan. I'm implementing an communication stack [1] where the
central behavior is a huge state machine / flow chart description [2] (the
state machine / flow chart is described on page 30 to 60). This is a task that
is hard to do right without any guidance. My idea is to figure out a way to
annotate the sources in a way to get the right points in control flow from
code. From this I like to create a diagram that is semantically equivalent to
the description in the spec. I'll need therefor things to create state machine
/ flow charts, meaning shapes, directed arrows, branches etc.. Well, my dream
would be to inject a real data packet into the communication layer and get a
diagram where the path taken is highlighted :)
The best approach I have til now is to generate a graphviz dot file for the
diagrams but using anything from Moose would indeed be nicer.
Norbert
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transaction_Capabilities_Application_Part
[2]
http://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC-Q.774-199706-I!!PDF-E&type=items
