[umbrello-devel] [umbrello] [Bug 335364] Assotiations between classes not really deleted from *.xmi file, and used for code generation.

[Ralf Habacker]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=335364

Ralf Habacker <ralf.habacker at freenet.de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |CONFIRMED
                 CC|                            |ralf.habacker at freenet.de
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from Ralf Habacker <ralf.habacker at freenet.de> ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Created attachment 86826 [details]
> bug reporduce example.
> 
> steps to reproduce:
> 
> 1. create class daigram
> 2. create class "super"
> 3. crate class "derived"
> 4. make generalization assotiation (Implements) between "super" and derived.
> 5. delete association.
> 6. generate all code (C++)
> 
> result:
> in the "derived.h":  class derived_class : public superclass 
> 
> if repeat steps 4, 5 few times:
> in the "derived.h":  class derived_class : public superclass, public
> superclass // two assotiations

The reason for this is that the related UMLAssociation has not been removed
from the document. In AssociationWidget::cleanup() I found the following
comment: 
     ....
     if (m_umlObject && m_umlObject->baseType() == UMLObject::ot_Association) {
        /*
           We do not remove the UMLAssociation from the document.
           Why? - Well, for example we might be in the middle of
           a cut/paste. If the UMLAssociation is removed by the cut
           then upon pasteing we have a problem.
           This is not quite clean yet - there should be a way to
           explicitly delete a UMLAssociation.  The Right Thing would
           be to have a ListView representation for UMLAssociation.
        `
                IF we are cut n pasting, why are we handling this association
as a pointer?
                We should be using the XMI representation for a cut and paste.
This
                allows us to be clean here, AND a choice of recreating the
object
                w/ same id IF its a "cut", or a new object if its a "copy"
operation
                (in which case we wouldnt be here, in cleanup()).
         */
        setUMLAssociation(0);
    }

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.