Author Topic: How to Update Connector Direction  (Read 3553 times)

Jeff Odell

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 99
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
How to Update Connector Direction
« on: September 03, 2007, 03:13:26 am »
I ran into a problem with an add-in (EA 7.0.816) where I setting the Connector Direction property didn't seem to work.  

I sent the following to Sparx support:

On an IDualConnector I'm setting the IDualConnector.Direction string to:

"Source -> Destination"

then calling IDualConnector.Update() on the connector.  However, the
value is not updated in the model.

It isn't entirely clear from the documentation what value I should be
sending through the API from the SDK documentation:

"Read/Write. Connector Direction. Can be set to one of the following: 1.
Unspecified, 2. Bi-Directional, 3. Source -> Destination, 4. Destination
-> Source. "

I also tried setting the value to the number listed in the
documentation.

Am I calling this correctly?  If so, could this be a bug?


They responded:

Unfortunately this is a known issue, however you can still affect a change by instead setting the values for ConnectorEnd.Navigable or ConnectorEnd.IsNavigable.
(See http://www.sparxsystems.com.au/EAUserGuide/connectorend.htm)

Issue ID: 07071084

- ConnectorEnd.Navigable accepts the following values:
"Navigable", "Non-Navigable" and "Unspecified"

- ConnectorEnd.IsNavigable is a boolean field which if set will correspond to the "Navigable" and "Non-Navigable" values.

Changing either of these values will affect the other, and should also affect the Connector.Direction value.


The IsNavigable property on ConnectionEnd worked for me.  Knowing this may save you some time in the future.

jlo

«Midnight»

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 5651
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • That nice Mister Grey
    • View Profile
Re: How to Update Connector Direction
« Reply #1 on: September 03, 2007, 04:49:13 am »
Thanks Jeff,

That's really good to know. I ran into this some time ago, and blundered into the solution on my own. However, this was after a significant rewrite of my application, and even then by accident.

At the time I did not make the (obvious) connection between the problem and solution, but assumed I'd been doing something incorrectly and now had the right approach.

So thanks for putting the big picture together, and publishing the whole thing so the rest of us can avoid this in future.

Now, hopefully Sparx will get this repaired, and also let us know...

David
No, you can't have it!