Hi Christian,
The synchronized feature should always be set in the table configuration model, so this step should not be required.
Nevertheless, if this step was required, we should transform the TableHeaderAxisConfiguration into a LocalRowHeaderAxisConfigruation and add a EStructuralFeaturevalueFillingConfiguration
to it. Some others stuff are probably required to do this changes.
Regards,
--
Vincent Lorenzo
De : mdt-papyrus.dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:mdt-papyrus.dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
De la part de LETAVERNIER Camille
Envoyé : mercredi 18 mai 2016 09:40
À : Papyrus Project list <mdt-papyrus.dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Objet : [PROVENANCE INTERNET] Re: [mdt-papyrus.dev] NattablePropertyEditor tries to modify its configuration without a transaction
Hi Christian,
As often, there is a
good bad reason for this: this was copied from my example/prototype implementation, which was about “ownedAttribute”. The UML Metamodel has at least 5 different “ownedAttribute” features (For Interface, StructuredClassifier, and a few others), but I
wanted to provide a single table configuration for all of them. So, when displaying the table, I simply replaced the actual feature on-the-fly
Of course, at this time, there were no transaction on this properties view integration of the table, and certainly no ServicesRegistry or ModelSet, so this wasn’t an issue
I believe this fragment of code has been copied as-is, even though it’s certainly not required for the general case (And specific case of Papyrus-RT Parameters), and wouldn’t work anymore with the new Transactional tables
HTH,
Camille
You know, the more I think about it, the more I feel like the NattablePropertyEditor just should not be trying to modify its table-configuration. It’s a read-only resource,
being deployed in a plug-in, and the change that the editor is trying to make is just setting the reference to what it already is (and should be) anyways.
I’ve raised bug 493853 so we can discuss there if necessary.
On 17 May, 2016 at 16:06:56, Christian Damus (give.a.damus@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
I am working on rebasing an old Gerrit change (review 66384) onto Neon, which was originally
implemented on the Papyrus Mars platform and has been rebased along on Neon in progressive fits and starts. Amongst numerous other refactorings, this needs to account for refactorings in the Nattable implementation of a property-sheet widget in the Papyrus
Properties framework.
On the latest (May 17) Papyrus build, I see this block of code in the NattablePropertyEditor class:
if
(null
!= synchronizedFeature) {
TableHeaderAxisConfiguration
rowHeaderAxisconfig =
tableConfiguration.getRowHeaderAxisConfiguration();
for (IAxisConfiguration
axisConfig : rowHeaderAxisconfig.getOwnedAxisConfigurations()) {
if (axisConfig
instanceof EStructuralFeatureValueFillingConfiguration) {
((EStructuralFeatureValueFillingConfiguration)
axisConfig).setListenFeature(synchronizedFeature);
}
}
}
This attempts to set the “listen feature” of an axis configuration in the table-configuration model. But, the configuration model is loaded in a ModelSet with a transactional
editing domain in a dedicated service-registry created by the NattablePropertyEditor so that would have to be done in a read/write transaction. Of course, there is no such transaction when showing the Properties view for a model selection. Consequently,
creation of the table widget blows up with an IllegalStateException on not having a transaction, and the table doesn’t appear in the Properties view.
Are we (Papyrus-RT) doing something wrong? It looks to me like the code snippet above could never possibly work. Why is it even trying to replace the “listen feature” that
is already set in the table-configuration? Is anybody else using a row-header axis configuration that contains a feature-value-filling configuration? Should this protocol-message parameters table in Papyrus-RT even be using it?
