[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [henshin-user] UML state machines and dangling edges?
|
You're totally right, the containment edge must be deleted (the
graphical editor does this by default, so I usually let it do this piece
of thinking for me :)).
Technically, both directions should work, since both edges are
EOpposites and thus EMF takes care of updating their correspondence. For
the sake of clarity, I prefer modeling the containment edge,
"transition" (as opposed to the container edge, "container"), since the
containment edge is a distinguished kind of edge and highlighted as such
in the editor.
Regards,
Daniel
Am 16.09.2015 um 18:15 schrieb Jens Bürger:
Am 16.09.2015 um 17:57 schrieb Daniel Strüber:
[…]
To get an intact rule, you have to specify the container
node and the connecting containment edge as preserved elements.
Are you sure that the connecting containment edge needs to be
specified as preserving? Isn't that exactly a dangling edge then?
However, I tried to model it as you suggested, but if I try to specify
the "transition" as preserve, the diagram editor also sets the
Transition node to preserve.
I'm not really sure what is the right direction for the containment
edge. I tried both with the most obvious possibilities for edge types
("container" for Transition->Region and "transition" for
Region->Transition) but none of this worked so far.
Greetings,
Jens
_______________________________________________
henshin-user mailing list
henshin-user@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/henshin-user
--
Dipl.-Inf. Daniel Strüber
Software Engineering Research Group
Philipps-Universität Marburg, Germany, Hans-Meerwein-Str., Room 05D12
Phone: +49-6421-28-21511
