![]() |
Telelogic DOORS (steve huntington) | ![]() |
new topic :
profile :
search :
help :
dashboard :
calendar :
home
|
||
Latest News:
|
|
Topic Title: What determiones order of displayed link info? Topic Summary: Created On: 30-Jul-2007 01:46 Status: Post and Reply |
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch |
![]() |
![]()
|
![]() |
|
Hi,
When using a "for do" loop in a DXL Layout script to display information about links for an object, what determines the order of appearance of the displayed link information? I used to think that the top down order was based on chronological order of link creation with the most recent link info at the top. However, a check of link creation dates has dispelled this for me. Anyone know? Also, has anyone seen the order of displayed link info in a DXL layout column flip? I have received reports from users that they are sure that they have opened a module and the order in which link info is being displayed in a DXL Layout column has flipped over - what used to be at the top of the displayed list is now at the bottom - they report that it seems to be a random occurance but was wondering if anyone else has experienced this? ------------------------- Paul Miller Specification Practices Specialist, EuroCyber, Melbourne, Australia. Mobile: +61 (0)418 135 103 Web Site: http://www.eurocyber.biz E-mail: miller@eurocyber.biz">pmiller@eurocyber.biz |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
This is not literally answering your post, but I always use skip lists in order to control the order of link display and in order to avoid such surprises.
Regards, Peter |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
I am pretty sure that the order for all "for something in thing" loops is creation date, although I have never actually sat down and tested this because it has never been important.
In the case of layout dxl, the order in which links are displayed seems to be determined by the creation date 0f the target/source object, not the link itself. Peter's advice is good. Always use skip lists if the order is significant. This is one of the best features of DXL. It gives you free sorting and also prevents duplicates in the list. ------------------------- Tony Goodman http://www.smartdxl.com |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Peter and Tony are suggesting this:
for each link { put in the Skip list KEY Target ObjID, DATA you want to display about that target } // Extract link info from Skip in sorted TargetID order: for DATA in skip do { displayRich(DATA) } |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
I also always thought that most things in for loops went by date, somehow. But links...I have seen things like your users report. I developed a script to gather linked requirements and copy them into the current module---basically a tree traversal (because of how we link here) that gets data only from leaf nodes. It prompts if there are any differences. (It turned out that, for our use, most of my fancy data structures-tree traversal-algorithm stuff was overkill, but I digress...)
Anyway, in testing it I found that no, the order that you get links in is NOT always the same. I had a tree structure linked as shown attached. I found that it would follow links so as to get the leaf nodes in different orders (despite having the same code)--but always in the same order as was displayed by the traceability columns. Right now, the columns are showing me "LDCA" (and I haven't gotten it to do anything different today), but in the past I've seen "ADCL" and "DCLA", and possibly others since those are the ones I have written in my notes. All that is to say that I noticed the issue in my scripts, but that it was the same in Telelogic scripts (the traceability columns). It occurs to me now, though, that perhaps I haven't been able to reproduce it today because we went from 7.1 to 8.1. I wonder what version you're running? Hope my ramblings are helpful.... Chris |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
In looking over the readme for the new patch today, I noticed the following as "New in version 8.1":
Data Accessibility makes data easier to find-->Traceability-->Link order consistency between link tips and Traceability columns Maybe that is this same issue? |
|
![]() |
FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2009 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.