Author Topic: Cranial implosion! Events and collaborations  (Read 2584 times)

sargasso

  • EA Practitioner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1406
  • Karma: +1/-2
  • 10 COMFROM 30; 20 HALT; 30 ONSUB(50,90,10)
    • View Profile
Cranial implosion! Events and collaborations
« on: May 31, 2004, 07:25:02 pm »
 ???
How do I show event signals on communications diagrams as being the same event?  

I have a simulation timer that fires tick events every so often.  On the diagram are several objects, all of which respond to the signal.  The order in which they respond is immaterial (he said bravely :-/)   Each object has its own handler method and therefore a message can be created from the associations between each object and the responding object - but they have sequence numbers on them that are confusing to say the least.

I am sure I have done this before  :(

Anyone - please help - I've got to give a pres on SOBA/SODA tomorrow and I need these diagrams to be particularly clean and as indicated I have had a real brain implosion.

tia
Bruce
"It is not so expressed, but what of that?
'Twere good you do so much for charity."

Oh I forgot, we aren't doing him are we.

mchiuminatto

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 113
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Cranial implosion! Events and collaborations
« Reply #1 on: June 01, 2004, 06:49:28 am »
First, you can Hide Collaboration Numbers in Diagram Properties.

Messages, in communication diagrams, have a property:  Control Flow Type\Kind ,  you can set the value to  Signal , but graphically makes no difference.

May be you can use an attached note to show that the message is an event handler.

Regards.

Marcello

sargasso

  • EA Practitioner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1406
  • Karma: +1/-2
  • 10 COMFROM 30; 20 HALT; 30 ONSUB(50,90,10)
    • View Profile
SOLVED: Cranial implosion! Events and...
« Reply #2 on: June 01, 2004, 04:34:40 pm »
Thanks Marcello!  Hiding the numbers was what I was after.

B  ;D
"It is not so expressed, but what of that?
'Twere good you do so much for charity."

Oh I forgot, we aren't doing him are we.