Eclipse Community Forums: VIATRA » Instancing twice to get results

Help

Home

Home » Modeling » VIATRA » Instancing twice to get results

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator

Instancing twice to get results [message #1717633]

Tue, 15 December 2015 12:34

Fon Vitale

Messages: 14
Registered: November 2011

Junior Member

Hi,

I'm new to VIATRA and EMF-IncQuery. I'm trying a simple m2m transformation using the Incremental Transformation API and getting some strange behaviour.

For a m2m transformation with a simple rule like (it transforms a model Model element of the source metamodel into a Model element of the target metamodel):

	val model2ModelRule = createRule.precondition(ModelMatcher::querySpecification).action(IncQueryActivationStateEnum.APPEARED) [
		var newModel = outResource.create(model) as Model
		newModel.name = m.name
		createTrace(m, newModel)
	].addLifeCycle(Lifecycles.getDefault(false, false)).build

With query:

pattern model(m : Model) {
	Model(m);
}

If I run:

IncrementalSimpleUML2RDB transformation = new IncrementalSimpleUML2RDB(inRsc, outRsc);
transformation.transform();

I don't get any result in outRsc (the output resource). But if I run:

IncrementalSimpleUML2RDB transformation = new IncrementalSimpleUML2RDB(inRsc, outRsc);
transformation.transform();

transformation = new IncrementalSimpleUML2RDB(inRsc, outRsc);
transformation.transform();

I do get results.

So, what am I misunderstanding wrongly?

Many thanks in advance.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Instancing twice to get results [message #1717636 is a reply to message #1717633]

Tue, 15 December 2015 13:38

Fon Vitale

Messages: 14
Registered: November 2011

Junior Member

Analyzing more deeply the situation, an NPE is launched when the match change its state (APPEARED -- FIRE --> FIRED). I have changed the activation state of the rule for FIRED, but the rule is never invoked.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Instancing twice to get results [message #1717658 is a reply to message #1717636]

Tue, 15 December 2015 15:20

Fon Vitale

Messages: 14
Registered: November 2011

Junior Member

Well, I found the problem. It was a bad instance in the initialization method of my transformation. My fault.

On the other hand, is there any way to control the execution order of the rules? I know that RuleOrderBasedFixedPriorityResolver exists, but I think that it works when tehre are conflicts.

Thanks you!

Report message to a moderator

Re: Instancing twice to get results [message #1717659 is a reply to message #1717658]

Tue, 15 December 2015 15:23

Abel Hegedus

Messages: 194
Registered: September 2015

Senior Member

Hi,

yes, when there are multiple activations that can be fired in the same time, the conflict resolver decides which is executed next.
For most M2M use case, either the FixedPriority or the InverseDisappearanceFixedPriority resolvers are appropriate.

Cheers

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic:	[Release] VIATRA 0.8.0
Next Topic:	EMF-Incquery website/p2 update site not available

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

]

Current Time: Tue Dec 01 18:25:01 GMT 2020

.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Breadcrumbs

Sign up to our Newsletter