Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improved validation in graphical flow creation tools #1204

Closed
philip-alldredge opened this issue Apr 25, 2018 · 0 comments · Fixed by #2255
Closed

Improved validation in graphical flow creation tools #1204

philip-alldredge opened this issue Apr 25, 2018 · 0 comments · Fixed by #2255

Comments

@philip-alldredge
Copy link
Collaborator

philip-alldredge commented Apr 25, 2018

Issue by philip-alldredge
Wednesday Feb 14, 2018 at 16:38 GMT
Originally opened as osate/osate-ge#296


The validation for the flow creation tools has been reduced because they were previously over constrained. They should be improved to allow the full capabilities of the language but to provide useful validation for when the flow being created would cause an error in the resulting model. Ideally, this would reuse the validation which is part of the text editor.

Additionally, need to test and support creating flows that extend to the subprogram calls. This can be confusing because IIRC, the flow must reference a subprogram subcomponent which is referenced by the call. Should check highlighting in that case too.

@philip-alldredge philip-alldredge changed the title Improved Validation In Graphical Flow Creation Tools Improved validation in graphical flow creation tools Sep 21, 2018
@philip-alldredge philip-alldredge added this to Increment 2 - 2020-05-29 in Graphical Editor Enhancements Jan 7, 2020
Graphical Editor Enhancements automation moved this from Increment 2 - 2020-05-29 to Done Apr 29, 2020
@lwrage lwrage added this to the 2.8.0 milestone Apr 30, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants