Author Topic: Links with multiple contraints  (Read 1463 times)

sargasso

  • EA Practitioner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1406
  • Karma: +1/-2
  • 10 COMFROM 30; 20 HALT; 30 ONSUB(50,90,10)
    • View Profile
Links with multiple contraints
« on: August 10, 2006, 10:55:59 pm »
Suggest :  If multiple stereotypes can now be seen on links, can we also have multiple constraints listed as well  - like how the superstructure shows them!

e.g.  {constraint1, constraint2, ...}

bruce
"It is not so expressed, but what of that?
'Twere good you do so much for charity."

Oh I forgot, we aren't doing him are we.

Jan ´Bary´ Glas

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 408
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Bary
    • View Profile
Re: Links with multiple contraints
« Reply #1 on: August 11, 2006, 12:56:50 am »
e.g. {<<pre-condition>>constraint1, <<post-condition>>constraint2>>  ::)
Jan 'Bary' Glas

SF_lt

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 216
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • The Truth Is Out There
    • View Profile
Re: Links with multiple contraints
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2006, 03:46:59 pm »
I second sargasso's suggestion
« Last Edit: August 24, 2006, 03:47:26 pm by SF_lt »
registertm everything to SparX

«Midnight»

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 5651
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • That nice Mister Grey
    • View Profile
Re: Links with multiple contraints
« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2006, 03:51:01 pm »
Oh yes!
No, you can't have it!

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 6148
  • Karma: +83/-85
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: Links with multiple contraints
« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2006, 09:08:46 pm »
Quote
Oh yes!
Needless to say, me too!

Paolo
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!

sargasso

  • EA Practitioner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1406
  • Karma: +1/-2
  • 10 COMFROM 30; 20 HALT; 30 ONSUB(50,90,10)
    • View Profile
Re: Links with multiple contraints
« Reply #5 on: August 25, 2006, 04:06:13 am »
To expound (as we did on the 14Feb1966 -- hee hee -- work that out non-Aussies!) :

Argument - I´m on the case for multiple display

* (Pro) Constraints on links seem to be becoming more important as UML matures (At least IMO)
* (Pro) Constraints, individually, seem to need to be manipulable individually.
* (Pro) EA gives, currently, some support to model the entire set of constraints on a link ... but it requires a lot of manual hacking to summate them to make them visible in the diagram.
* (Con) Modellers could create a ****load of cranky diagrams if there are ¨too many¨ constraints.  Counter = This is an exception for the modeller to worry about.
* (Con) Constraints on liks are curently compounded with other link characteristics when shown as a link label. Counter = So fix that too.

Sparxians - over to you.

bruce
"It is not so expressed, but what of that?
'Twere good you do so much for charity."

Oh I forgot, we aren't doing him are we.