| Incorrect Set Value operation on collection? [message #1229477] |
Thu, 09 January 2014 14:24  |
 Wilbert Alberts
Messages: 209
Registered: June 2010 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi,
I created a simple meta model consisting of a Container and Nodes. The Container holds Nodes using two composition references: rightnodes and leftnodes. Furthermore, the container maintains a reference to all nodes via (a non containment feature) allnodes.
Based on that model I created an editor that provides the ability to create 'leftnodes' and 'rightnodes'. Upon invocation of such tool, a new Node instance is created and added to the corresponding Container feature(leftnodes or rightnodes).
However I also need to update the 'allnodes' feature. Therefore, my addLeftNode tool definition looks like:
Create Instance Node (reference name = leftnodes, variable name is instance)
- Set Value side
- Set Value name
- Change context var:container
-- Set Value allnodes
Obviously the purpose of the Set Value allnodes action is to add the newly added node to the allnodes feature.
By mistake I set the value of allnodes to [ Set{instance} /] To my opinion, this expression assign a new collection holding only the new instance to the allnodes feature.
However, I was surprised to discover that each newly added Node got added to the allnodes feature. So instead of assigning a new Set to the allnodes feature, a new entitiy is added upon each tool invocation.
Am I doing something wrong or is this a bug? In case of the former, please explain to me what is going on?
Greetings,
Wilbert.
|
|
|
| Re: Incorrect Set Value operation on collection? [message #1229514 is a reply to message #1229477] |
Thu, 09 January 2014 15:58  |
|
Hi Wilbert,
this is a known and a wanted behavior (because most of the time you want
to add elements not replace your list content). Notice that this allows
to use the same syntax for mono-valued and multi-valued references.
If you want to set the whole list, first do an Unset and then call your
Set {instance}.
Notice that this is similaire to what you would do with the EMF API :
myList.clear();
myList.add(myElement);
Best regards,
Alex
|
|
|
|
| Re: Incorrect Set Value operation on collection? [message #1229799 is a reply to message #1229789] |
Fri, 10 January 2014 08:37 |
|
Hi Wilbert,
we would indeed appreciate if you raised a bugzilla issue to update the
Set instruction documentation. Could you also include the 2 updates you
mentionned in your latest posts:
- Make sure that we are consistent with the use of "Go To"/"Change Context"
- Update the CreateInstance (and general Model operations) documentation
to detail the variables Scope
Thanks a lot for your feedbacks,
Alex
Le 10/01/2014 09:15, Wilbert Alberts a écrit :
> Hi Alex,
>
> That sounds reasonable though it goes against my intuition. Setting a
> value is something different from extending a collection.
>
> However, in that case it might be wise to update the documentation for
> the Set Value operation as it clearly states that it sets the value of a
> feature.
>
> Does it help if I file a bug against this (to update the documentation,
> not necessarily to update the behavior)? Note that the documentation of
> the model operation has some other areas that might deserve some
> attention. (Especially "Go To" seems to be renamed to "Change context"
> which is a much more sensible name in my opinion.
>
> Greetings,
> Wilbert.
>
>
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03798 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
