Summary: | API: Gate infrastructure consistency issues | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Modeling] GMF-Runtime | Reporter: | Steven R. Shaw <steveshaw> | ||||
Component: | General | Assignee: | Cherie Revells <crevells> | ||||
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |||||
Severity: | enhancement | ||||||
Priority: | P1 | Keywords: | api | ||||
Version: | 1.0 | ||||||
Target Milestone: | 1.0 | ||||||
Hardware: | PC | ||||||
OS: | Windows XP | ||||||
Whiteboard: | |||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Steven R. Shaw
2005-10-07 11:55:42 EDT
#1. GateEditPart and GatedShapeEditPart could be collapsed into one. In the beginning we wanted to keep two separate editparts but gates themselves could contain gates. #2. Yes we can remove some of these functions... I'm not sure who added them. I believe it was for ease of use. We probably evolved out of them. Also, #3. FixedDistanceGatedPane* should be removed. #4. One downside to the current implementation of gates is that their bounds are not taken into account in viewports. We should move to a design where we have some larger figure as a parent and gates within. We would therefore not need to override the paint and clipping region. #5. remove GatedFigure.addGate() .. use the GEF default .add() etc. Also classes should be renamed to something more generic: Border, Bordered etc. Gate naming issue is captured by bugzilla 113157 Consider making BorderItemContainerFigure private. Created attachment 32478 [details]
API Changes
Document describing the API changes.
See attached doc for API changes. [target cleanup] 1.0 M4 was the original target milestone for this bug [GMF Restructure] Bug 319140 : product GMF and component Runtime Diagram was the original product and component for this bug |