Alloy theme definition interface allows to assign a customized image for each signature. It is possible to choose an image from a list of predefined images. But, I am wondering if it is possible to add my own image to this list?!
The alloy source code is available and you may edit it to your needs.
The source code is included in the jar you use to run the Alloy Analyzer.
There is no built-in customization to do this.
Related
I am trying to modify the parameters in openmodelica version 1.9.1 beta 2 using OMEdit.
But the the OK button is deactivated and no change takes effect.
Is there a way to modify and run the example?
You can not edit the system libraries e.g Modelica. But you can extend them and then you can change the parameters. Create a new model M and extend it from your example (You can do it in Create New Modelica Class Dialog).
I imported my Java code in Enterprise Architect with the code engineering tool. If I add a class in the class diagram editor (UML) it automatically adds the associations and the generalizations but not the dependencies. Is it possible to setup EA that it also includes the existing dependencies from source code (local variables, parameters etc)?
There is one option you can set which controls this in EA 10: look at Tools -- Options -- Source Code Engineering. The last of the list of check boxes is called "Create dependencies for operation returns and parameter types."
This solves the problem as far as parameters are concerned (you'd have to reimport the code, of course), but I haven't tested it to see how it deals with local variables. I'm guessing it doesn't create dependencies for those.
Here is my scenario...
Using Orchard CMS 1.7.1 I have created a custom Content Type named 'VistaImage' using the Orchard UI. This Content Type defines one field based on a Media Library Picker Field, this field is also named 'VistaImage'.
A Projection of groups of Vista Images are placed in the 'Featured' Zone as a Widget reference and works well.
Using the Shape Tracer on the resulting page(s), the shape hierarchy looks as follows:
Zone [Featured]
Widget
List
Content Alt: Content-VistaImage
Fields_MediaLibraryPicker Alt: Fields.MediaLibraryPicker-VistaImage
Media
Parts_Image_Summary
What I want to do is to provide alternative shapes from the Content shape downwards. This is easy enough for Content itself and for Fields_MediaLibraryPicker (as the Shape Tracer automatically provides applicable alternatives (as indicated above)).
My problem comes in providing alternatives for the Media and Parts_Image_Summary parts.
Looking at the documentation for Alternates on the Orchard web site, I thought that if I created a new shape in my Theme at at /Views/Parts/Image.Summary-VistaImage.cshtml this would get referenced, but it does not (though if I remove the '-VistaImage' the shape does get used, but this would, I believe change this shape for every Content Type, which is not what I want to do).
Any advice/direction on how I should approach this requirement would be apprciated.
Thanks.
From personal experience, when you get that low level in the shapes, alternatives don't work very well, if at all. The only way I best deal with those scenarios is to choose the next applicable shape above it, and do an if statement to determine if its the content you want, in which case to remove the default shape display and implement your own hard-coded layout.
eg if the shape simplay says #display(Model.whatever) and you know that displays is garbage for you, look into the model.
For example, I had trouble creating a 4 leveled menu for bootstrap as it only typically deals with 2 levels, so i manipulated the lowest level shape. I.e:
if{Model.Items.Any()}{
//code to generate another submenu for that menuItem
}
This may not even be the most correct way to address this, just the solution I found has worked.
So in your case I'd use VS debug and breakpoint where the mediafield picker is rendered, and find out if the model holds any information letting you know it's your VistaImage content.
I'm working on an Orchard site where I want to document some code - a series of plugins and a set of commands that each plugin can handle.
So I'd like to have a page for each plugin, and a page for each available command, then somehow link the plugins with their supported commands.
On the plugin page, I'd like to have a list of all the commands supported by that plugin.
Conversely, on the page where each command is documented, I'd like to list all the plugins that support it. This seems to be a many-to-many relationship.
I'm happy with creating content types and I guess I'll create a 'Plugin' content type and a 'Command' content type. I expect the solution will somehow involve the use of queries. I'm not really sure how to tie it all together though.
I'm not really sure how to approach this. Has anyone got any suggestions for how to achieve this? Is there a way to do this just by configuration and defining new content types, or do you think I'll need to write code?
You can either use a content picker field configured for multiple items, or you can implement it following this doc topic: http://docs.orchardproject.net/Documentation/Creating-1-n-and-n-n-relations
One option is to us the Mechanics Module, which gives you a way to create relationships between parts either in your data migration or using the admin UI. See the Mechanics Documentation to find out more.
I am creating a series of window mockup templates based on the excellent Mockups library available on CodePlex.
I'm using their BaseMockup as the base for my control as well, and I followed the same outline of the steps listed here for sub-deriving from existing controls (Create a new empty class, add your default style to /Themes/generic.xaml, etc.)
The control is working great - the only thing is that it doesn't show up in the Assets library. I think this is because it's sub-derived, or because I need some attribute (the equivalent of the ToolboxItemAttribute for WinForms controls? ... which didn't work) to get it hooked up.
When I modify the code to derive directly from Control, it shows up - no custom attribute necessary. Of course that defeats the purpose of what I'm trying to do though...
The only thing I can find are several articles telling me to muck with registry keys, and none of them are clear or suggest a definitive way to do this with Blend 4. That last one advertises as a Blend 4 tips article, but admits at the end that it plagiarizes the content from the other two (for Blend 3).
Is that my only option - register my DLL? Is there a better way to do this?
A while ago I wrote a blogpost about this. I've included a .reg file and a .bat file for setting up the register and some directories. I think that's what you are looking for.
I believe you do need to muck with registry keys. Specifically,
32 bit: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\.NET Framework\v4.0.30319\AssemblyFoldersEx
64 bit: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\.NET Framework\v4.0.30319\AssemblyFoldersEx
Create a new key with the name of your control assembly. Then edit the Default string value under this key and set the value to the directory where the control assemblies are installed. See here for a full example (using the Silverlight paths).
Found it - there is an analogue attribute after all, it's ToolboxBrowsableAttribute.
You have to go through a little more rigmarole to get it set up, but it works great - no registry mucking necessary. It requires creating a designer metadata provider class, attributing your assembly so it's designer-discoverable, and then adding the attributes to your sub-derived controls inside your metadata provider.
Make sure you choose the appropriate version of the page for your version of Visual Studio, because the interface changes a good bit between 2008 and 2010.
This article on CodeProject has some good, real-world examples of setting this up. They're all in the 2008 style though, so bear that in mind if you're using 2010.