Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - SF_lt

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15
Suggestions and Requests / Re: Bug Submission feature requests
« on: March 08, 2006, 12:25:49 pm »
for the current state, we could use this forum for a bug/request description. Then report to sparx links for a descriptions (I try to follow this scheme)

Subject also could be prepended with the FIX or REQUEST, for example:
FIX: OCL bugs
REQUEST: better note position

Of course, public accessible bug tracking system would be the best choice

Suggestions and Requests / enable multiple selection
« on: August 12, 2008, 08:43:42 pm »
no way to select multiple objects in boundaries, fragments

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Packages, Namespaces & groupings
« on: October 09, 2006, 12:57:25 pm »
agree, this should be quick easily doible with the stereotypes

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Modeling Support
« on: May 01, 2007, 02:59:35 am »

personally, I don't want to see EA as a MDA transformation tool. It's too much - you want too much functionality, which will be rarely used by most users (remember Paretto principle?), interface would be more unique and at least tricky.
Everything in one means nothing at good level - this is not my vision of the EA. Agree, that EA would be nice to see as modelling tool for the MDA - metamodels, models, but not more. Of course, working OCL in EA would be really nice

For the MDA I suggest ATL in Eclipse - it's working, good support, high proliferation, just try it for model transformations

bug isn't fixed in EA 7.0  :-/

Jim, you haven't read carefully ;D - problem is with the aggregations/compositions. Workaround is to draw association instead of aggregation/composition and to set aggregation kind for the end.

and can get stereotypes on all association ends "shared" or otherwise.

stereotypes on aggregation/composition ends aren't shown - it's not an issue with th association, so this definitely is the BUG

workaround: draw association, then set one of it's end for share aggregation :-/

Also, stereotype position/alignment management for the association end is f...ed up - should I post screenshot? really not good for me, any other oppinions?

Registered as bug requesting to fix for the next build  ;)

Suggestions and Requests / Re: IDEA: Improved Notes window
« on: April 23, 2007, 10:23:44 pm »
so I refine proposal:
if class is set to be realized in C#/Java or None, dot notation should be used Fred.GetBill
if class is set to be realized in C++, column notation should be used Fred::GetBill (Fred.GetBill would mean class attribute, not method)

another point is how to distinct class attributes, methods, overloaded methods?

method   -(for Fred.GetBill())
attribute-(for Fred.GetBill)

what about overloaded params if there several GetBill methods
Fred.GetBill(), Fred.GetBill(Sum), Fred.GetBill(date) & etc

Suggestions and Requests / Re: IDEA: Improved Notes window
« on: April 23, 2007, 09:55:58 am »

this idea is similar to my one year old suggestion, but I support idea.

However suggest, that note visualization should account class realization language:
for C#/Java would show Fred.GetBill
for C++ would show Fred::GetBill

Paolo, would you register your proposal? ;)

Suggestions and Requests / Re: more support of firebird !
« on: March 23, 2007, 01:11:39 am »
Don't know what they are thinking of in this area. We'll have to wait and see.

usually Simonn have shared some Sparx visions and ETA ;)

Suggestions and Requests / Re: more support of firebird !
« on: March 22, 2007, 06:06:16 am »
register this as suggestion, post in a forum doesn't mean, that this request would be addressed during "EA future/features planning"

btw, is sparx working on the new EA version, not minor build? if so, what new & old features we can hope? :)

Suggestions and Requests / Re: IDEA: Feature linked Note functionality
« on: March 15, 2007, 05:50:37 am »
agree, maybe different link style ...

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Connector segment suppression
« on: January 23, 2007, 05:20:26 am »
actually, I also don't like suppressed segment end visualization - I think, (connector text at the end) surrounding box isn't needed
For me would be enough:

------(a)                   (a)--------

other oppinions?

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Connector segment suppression
« on: January 19, 2007, 06:34:52 am »
As I understand, still no progress in this field :-/ - correct me if I'm wrong

Paolo, could you again registertm[/color] your suggestion on suppressed segments naming with letters (and keeping them unique in diagram of course).

Consistency, SparX, consistency plz ;) - association names aren't unique

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Connector segment suppression
« on: October 09, 2006, 01:06:48 pm »
add my vote - nice feature

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15