|Re: Can a state machine be a child of another state state machine [message #1795741 is a reply to message #1795686]
||Thu, 27 September 2018 15:02
| Ernesto Posse
Registered: March 2011
Your message is confusing: it has a reference to "version 1.1.0" (and the header talks about version 0.7), however the latest release of Papyrus-RT is 1.0, there is no version 1.1.0. Furthermore, the diagrams appear to be of an *older* version of Papyrus-RT, i.e. 0.9 or earlier (presumably 0.7?) Furthermore, the message confusingly refers to a model in a zip file which is not attached, and to the combination of Papyrus-RT with "normal code". Can you clarify? |
UML-RT state machines are hierarchical, meaning that some states can be *composite* states, i.e., they can contain states and transitions inside states, as your diagram shows, but this is not the same as containing a full state machine. The UML standard does allow full State Machines within State Machines, i.e. sub-state machines or submachines for short, but that is not the same as composite states, although very similar. Check  for details on the difference, particularly section "126.96.36.199.7 Submachine States and submachines". UML-RT supports composite states, but not submachines. Having said that, Papyrus-RT implements such composite states, both in modelling and their semantics in generated code.
If your question is whether a model created with a pre-1.0 version of Papyrus-RT can be opened in 1.0, the answer is that maybe, but there are no guarantees, and many may fail. But the hierarchal structure of state machines should not be a problem.
[Updated on: Thu, 27 September 2018 15:10]
Report message to a moderator
Powered by FUDForum
. Page generated in 0.01878 seconds