784 no boundary event after event based gateway #873
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ghost
assigned 
|
after review session with @barmac another case should be considered:
|
pinussilvestrus
force-pushed
the
784-no-boundary-event-after-event-based-gateway
branch
from
a219fb8
to
a91b54a
Compare
barmac
reviewed
Oct 16, 2018
| * Behavior for deleting boundaries from receive task after connecting them with event based gateway | ||
| */ | ||
| export default function ConnectEventBasedGatewayBehavior( | ||
| eventBus, modeling, bpmnRules) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
bpmnRules is actually never used, so I think we should remove it before merge.
barmac
reviewed
Oct 16, 2018
|
|
||
| if (is(source, 'bpmn:EventBasedGateway') && | ||
| isReceiveTaskWithBoundary(target)) { | ||
| modeling.removeElements(extractBoundaryEvents(target)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So we invoke extractBoundaryEvents twice: first to check if the element is a ReceiveTask with BoundaryEvents, and then to filter out all the BoundaryEvents and remove them. Why don't we filter the events once and then remove them if it's necessary? :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
adjusted and rebased it :)
barmac
reviewed
Oct 16, 2018
|
|
||
| var diagramXML = require('./ConnectEventBasedGatewayBehavior.bpmn'); | ||
|
|
||
| beforeEach(bootstrapModeler(diagramXML, { modules: testModules.concat(modelingModule) })); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do we add modelingModule second time here? The tests seem to work without it.
barmac
reviewed
Oct 16, 2018
pinussilvestrus
force-pushed
the
784-no-boundary-event-after-event-based-gateway
branch
from
a91b54a
to
e25e816
Compare
…ive tasks after connecting to event based gateway
pinussilvestrus
force-pushed
the
784-no-boundary-event-after-event-based-gateway
branch
from
e25e816
to
b8b84e3
Compare
delete-merged-branch
bot
deleted the
784-no-boundary-event-after-event-based-gateway
branch
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Implemented a Bpmn rule that it shouldn't be possible to attach a BoundaryEvent on a ReceiveTask following a EventBasedGateway in two different ways:
Closes camunda/camunda-modeler#784