A feature or bug in synchronization

[niceno]

Hi everyone,


I am currently evaluating the Professional version of EA. I do like the program very much, until I have encountered something which I really disliked. Let me explain you what is it. I have written a very small code:

class A{

};

class B{

};

I have imported the code into EA (Project -> Source Code Engineering -> Import Source Directory) and it created a small UML diagram. Nice and neat, no question about it. Then I have modified the code with EA bult-in editor. I placed an instance of class A into B like this:

class A{

};

class B{
 A a;
};

Then I synchronized the sources (Project -> Source Code Engineering -> Synchronize Package Contents) and it swiftly connected the classes "A" and "B" on the diagram. I was delighted. But then I wanted to go back, and erased member "a" from class "B". I synchronized the sources again (Project -> Source Code Engineering -> Synchronize Package Contents), but nothing changed in the diagram. Classes "A" and "B" were still connected as before.

Well, I do not know if this behaviour is normal (is it a feature of EA) or is it abnormal (a bug). If it is a feature, I think it makes EA quite inconvenient for serious work because it requires form the user to update the diagrams by hand which is error-prone and to my mind makes EA unusable.  

If it is a bug, then I guess it is not so bad, EA developers will hopefully soon resolve it.

So please, can anyone let me know: is the behaviour I describe in this message a feature or bug.


   Sincerely,


   Bojan Niceno

[mbc]

Try to play with the options in Tools-Options-Generation-Attributes/Operations. They might get you closer to what you want.

However, my guess is that you will still not be completely satisfied. The problem is that EA treats attributes and association roles as separate things (which they also are in UML). But the normal way of implementing an association is with an attribute, so EA generates them for you automatically. After that, it won't keep the association and the attribute consistent. Deleting the attribute from the code will remove the attribute, but not the association, so the next time you generate, a new attribute will be created automatically implementing the still-existent association.

[niceno]

Thank you very much for the fast reply.

OK, I see that attributes and associations are different things, but wouldn't it be good if an association "knew" if it was created from an attribute and later alert the user if this very attribute was removed?

   Sincerely,


   Bojan

[mbc]

Yes, it would be good! But unfortunately, it doesn't.

Mikkel

[niceno]

So it will not be implemented in foreseeable future?

[mbc]

That's a question you need to ask Sparx Systems.

Mikkel

[niceno]

I see, I guessed that you were from Sparx Systems.

[thomaskilian]

Hi Bojan,
you recognize Sparx stuff by the 5 red stars.