Properties

Hi Stephane
thanks for your reoly. Sorry for not having come back to you earlier but I didn’t get a notification
Another question:
I have a function ‘that has a method’ that may need be invoked under different circumstances.
What I thought I’d do (and I want to have a REC out of this) is to create a property value group with

  • command
  • when to invoke
    How do I create a list of ‘Property Value Groups’?
    What I want to be able to achieve is, when I create an RPL I am able to ‘add’ a new command depending on the function with which I am working (an empty list to which I am adding stuff). Is this possible or do I need to do that only when I instantiate the REC?
    Thanks
    Ricardo

Hello Ricardo,
ricardo.deoliveira.cgi.co wrote on Fri, 11 May 2018 05:44
How do I create a list of ‘Property Value Groups’?
You can create a Property Value Group which contains other Property Value Groups!
Meanwhile, I’m not sure to fully understand your need: is the list of Property Value Groups needed to manage a list of “methods” that will be shared by all your functions, with only the “command” and “when to invoke” property being specific for each function?

HI Aurelien
Thanks
for your reply.
I already have a Property Value Group that holds other Property Value Groups.
Maybe I can try to explain myself a little bit better.
When you have a car with a media system you can connect different types of players: e.g. a DVD Player, a CD player, a USB stick. But you have one media system. So what I wanted to do is to be able to, for different cars, connect different players a have a ‘list of players’ for a specifica car model.
Thanks
Ricaro

Hi Ricardo,
Ideally when changing topic, the best is to create a new thread
I am not sure I understand the link between your questions about Property Values and the “car/player” example you mention. For the example you mention, we usually rely on Product Line Engineering techniques. We have a model representing 150% of our options (meaning several times a “player function” allocated to several different components), we have a feature model representing all the option and the constraints between them (in a tool like Pure::Variants) and a mapping between the architecture and feature models. In other words, we specify variability in the architecture. The tooling then allows to derive the 150% (product) model in a project-specific one (i.e. one where we have made choices between the options). That might be too much in your case, I don’t know.
Would you be able to elaborate on your car example and send us how you would model that in Capella? So that we can better understand your need?

Copyright © Eclipse Capella, the Eclipse Capella logo, Eclipse and the Eclipse logo are Trademarks of The Eclipse Foundation.