This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 93512 - Different procedures produce different sequence diagrams
Summary: Different procedures produce different sequence diagrams
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: uml
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Diagram Sequence (show other bugs)
Version: 5.x
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 blocker (vote)
Assignee: issues@uml
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-01-30 06:45 UTC by alandavidson2
Modified: 2008-05-20 04:59 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: ENHANCEMENT
Exception Reporter:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description alandavidson2 2007-01-30 06:45:09 UTC
There are two ways to produce a sequence diagram. For large diagrams, Method 1
below (normal method) takes about half the time, and produces a diagram that is
about 10 times wider than Method 2.

Method 1.

This is recommended in the help.

Right-click on the required operation in the dependency diagram. Approximately
half of the total time is now taken up waiting for the dialog to launch. The
spacing between each object can be 10 times the label width of a typical object.

Method 2.

Proposed by petersl. Right-click on the operation under "Operations" in the
model tree. The dialog is launched instantaneously. The total time taken from
clicking on the operation is 2-3 times longer. The diagram objects are
reasonably spaced with a separation of approximately one-third of the label
width of a typical object.

I suggest that in the normal method (Method 1), the dialog should be launched
instantaneously. I don't think it's normal UI practice to do a lot of work
before launching a dialog. After all, the user may decide to cancel when the
dialog appears, so the initial work is wasted.

I would like to see the diagram width to be the same (and as narrow as possible)
in both cases.
Comment 1 Sergey Petrov 2008-05-14 08:49:09 UTC
some changes was made in re-op creation, so may be initiaql  issues are resolved now, but without "bad" sample it's hard
to say certainly