nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

The Factory

medini_1024169437

As you know, we are working on an extension of the Scripting API that allows users to create objects, i.e. an Object Factory. To drive this process we decided to start with a script library that offers a simple factory API for a bunch of selected object types as Failure Modes or Requirements. That famous factory.js library is now used in quite a few scripts and the number of supported object types is growing with each version. Still, the API is not settled and a final feedback round is pending. But that's a different story.

New: Safety Mechanisms

In this thread I would like to announce a new version of the factory library that can create Measure Catalogs as well as Safety Mechanism Catalogs and their respective content. Some care has to be taken when creating the collections since their collection type has to be set afterwards. An example of a Measure Catalog with Measures:

// create a measure catalog with measures
var catalog = Factory.createElement(finder.getScope(), Metamodel.safetyModel.MeasureCatalog);
catalog.name = "My Measures";
var m1 = Factory.createElement(catalog, Metamodel.safetyModel.Measure);
m1.name ="Prevent anything";
var m2 = Factory.createElement(catalog, Metamodel.safetyModel.Measure);
m2.name ="Observe the rest";

As you can see, the create catalog can be used right away to fill it with Measure instances. Its different if you create catalogs for Safety Mechanisms:

var catalog2 = Factory.createElement(finder.getScope(), Metamodel.safetyModel.MeasureCatalog);
catalog2.name = "My Mechanisms";
catalog2.collectionType = Metamodel.safetyModel.SafetyMechanism;
var sm1 = Factory.createElement(catalog2, Metamodel.safetyModel.SafetyMechanism);
sm1.name ="Null Check";
var sm2 = Factory.createElement(catalog2, Metamodel.safetyModel.SafetyMechanism);
sm2.name ="CRC";

Its important to set the collection type to Safety Mechanism, otherwise any creation of new mechanisms will fail with an exception. Last but now least an example of an Error Collection for completeness (this was possible with earlier versions too:

// create a failure collection with failure modes
var collection = Factory.createElement(finder.getScope(), Metamodel.safetyModel.FailureCollection);
collection.collectionType = Metamodel.safetyModel.FailureMode;
var e1 = Factory.createElement(collection, Metamodel.safetyModel.FailureMode);
e1.name ="Short";

The latest factory is attached to this post. Happy Scripting!

Find more posts tagged with

medini

medini legacy

Accepted answers

All comments

medini_1024169437

The latest factory library (2017-09-13). Note that the library is provided as usual "as is" without warranty of any kind.

medini_1004872874

Thanks a lot Jan.

Do you think that with the current factory.js here attached we could create DC Worksheets via the createFMEAWorksheet function or we need further extension ?

Thanks a lot for your feedback.

Florent

medini_1024169437

Hi Florent,

thanks for reading and commenting. I think its possible to create FMEA worksheets, but not DC yet. Furthermore this would just create the worksheet but not synchronize it with the system model. So this typical activity that happens the first time you switch to the "Worksheet" tab. Its feasible to trigger this by a script but not with factory.js.

medini_1024169437

And here we have yet another update of the factory library now supporting the creation of SysML connectors. An example that creates two parts and a connector in between:

var scope = finder.findByType(Metamodel.sysml.SysMLContainerPackage, true).first();
if (scope) {
	var p1 = Factory.createElement(scope, Metamodel.sysml.SysMLPart);
	p1.name = "p1";
	var p2 = Factory.createElement(scope, Metamodel.sysml.SysMLPart);
	p2.name = "p2";
	var c1 = Factory.createRelation(p1, p2, Metamodel.sysml.SysMLConnector);
	c1.name = "My first connector created by a script";
} else {
	console.error("Warning: no container package to test SysML");
}

Happy scripting!

medini_1019619963

I noticed, that when factory is used then user interface sometimes falls behind.

In a DC worksheet new evaluation groups have been created, the user interface wasn't able to display them correctly. This happens only once after changing amount of evaluation groups, reopening the editor forces UI to read the structure again and afterwards DC Worksheet is displayed correctly.

medini_1024169437

Is this happening even though the editor is open or was the editor closed when running the script?

medini_1019619963

I observed that only when the editor was open.

Components were not completely in sync with evaluation groups in the editor. I used to hide components column to avoid confusion (in the project browser a correct component name was highlighted).

medini_1024169437

Ok, that's odd. Do you have a snippet fo your script that causes this behavior, or a hint what kind of objects you create?

Jan

medini_1024169437

And yet another update of the factory library now supporting the creation of variables. Variables can be created in a "Failable" from MM perspective, however, in reality that's mainly parts and ports, so elements that have the "Prediction" tab. Be careful about selecting the scope when creating variables.

Note that currently the Reliability MM is not available at the Metamodel singleton so we had to use a little trick to get it working. Here is an example how to create a part and a variable:

// create a part and a variable inside
{
	var scope = finder.findByType(Metamodel.sysml.SysMLContainerPackage, true).first();
	if (scope) {
		var failable = Factory.createElement(scope, Metamodel.sysml.SysMLPart);
		failable.name = "Failable";

		// now create variable
		var v1 = Factory.createElement(failable, "FRVariable");
		v1.name = "Teta_U";
		v1.unit = "C";
		v1.value = "0.0";

	} else {
		console.error("Warning: no container package to test SysML");
	}
}

Happy Scripting!

medini_1024169437

I got a few replies stating that users failed when using the factory library with an error saying that "bind" is not found or (as it ought to be) saying "This script requires extended API". As mentioned in other articles the factory library was published as experimental code to come to a fixed API before including it in the native scripting environment. In order to run scripts with experimental API a special tag is required in the first line of the script. In order to help I have added an example to this message that shows how to include the library with the right tag in the first line ($EXPERIMENTAL$) but also with a few examples to show the usage.

Happy Scripting

Jan

medini_1025807970

Thank you Jan! BR, Brian.

medini_1024169437

And yet another update, introducing support for important relationships SysMLDependency and SysMLAbstraction. Thanks to Anthony for reminder :-)

Happy Scripting

Jan

medini_1051182002

Hi Jan,

Getting this error "Failed to execute Java Script: ReferenceError: "bind" is not defined. (factory.js#5)

ReferenceError: "bind" is not defined. (factory.js#5)"

When i try to excute the Factory.js

Is there any supporting js files to be added or any configuration settings to be done in the project.

I am a new to medini development.

Thanks

Dinesh

medini_1024169437

Hi Dinesh,

the factory.js cannot be executed, its a library that has to be imported, but maybe you mean that.

Please check the "Test Factory.js" earlier in the threat to see the usage. Note especially the first line of this sample script,

its mandatory.

Jan

medini_1051182002

Hi Jan,

Thank you for your information. Able to execute the sample script.

Dinesh

medini_1024169437

Good!

Happy Scripting

Jan

medini_1036016653

Your two year old example showed me that I require the factory.js for creating a variable. That worked fine - thank you!

Can you tell me an efficient way to only create a variable, if it does not yet exist? May be you want to consider adding this as an optional parameter to the factory, e.g. "bCreateOnlyIfNotExisting = false" (default to false, to keep current behavior).

medini_1036016653

oh well...

So for now I hacked this myself using a helper function that iterates over the array of variables to check if it already exists. The actual situation is more involved, as "IFailureRateData" has variables defined both in "variables" (from failure rate catalog) and/or "userVariables".

// check if a variable exists inside a list of variables
// loop over all entries of the array and compare the name attribute
function checkIfVarExists(vars, name) {
	console.log ("looping over array, looking for {0}", name);
	var arr = vars.toArray();
	for (var i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
		if (arr[i].name == name) {
			console.log("found"); 
			return true;
		}
	}
	console.log("not found");
	return false;
}

medini_1024169437

Happy New Year Peter!

There is an additional library called "finderEx.js". That one has typical entries like "findOrCreateXXX", XXX being FailureMode, Part Package etc.

Please also check the "Test Finderex.js" to see how its used.

I think that's what you actually were looking for and implementing yourself.

There is currently no support for variables, but we could add it there to improve the library, what do you think?

Jan

medini_1036016653

Happy new year Jan!

Indeed I also looked at finderEx.js, but as you stated, it does not cover variables. I welcome that functionality to be added to this library, but please take the different storage places of variable into account. That is actually something I'm currently looking at.

Best regards

Peter

medini_1024169437

Perfect, I can "volunteer" to add that feature, maybe we can agree on the API.

So following what we have it would be:

function findOrCreateVariable(scope, name);

Scope could be any element that can contain / define variables, so any "Failable".

Name would be the name of the variable, should be unique anyway.

I assume you want to create ONLY user variables, right?

Jan

medini_1036016653

My scenario is to ensure I can apply a operating voltage U as custom value and ambient temperature Teta_U as mission profile on the BOM. This though is only possible, when the Hardware Part Library also has these two variables listed and checked as derived (which came as a surprise to me). Even though I personally don't care if it is a "userVariable" or a "variable", I have to prevent duplication, as this will upset medini.

So, if a hardware part type already lists "Teta_U" as a variable, I may not also add the user variable "Teta_U" but shall only set "derived" of the existing variable.

My script currently works in two passes:

- Hardware Part Library: Prepare hardware part types for usage in projects, as some variables need to be set to "derived":
operating voltage U, ambient temperature Teta_U

- BOM: Prepare hardware parts, so that mission profile can be applied, by setting variable ambient temperature Teta_U to "derived"

I hope that clarifies my intention.

Your proposal for the API sounds fine. So you propose to add the variable to userVariables, if it does not yet exist in either variables or userVariables. If it exists thatn the object is returned. Yepp, that should work for me. I'll go with my own approach for now, but will gladly transition to your solution, once you release an updated library.

Best regards

Peter

medini_1036016653

Dear Jan,

may be you can reuse parts of my functions. Possibly there is a smart way to combine checkIfVarExists() and returnVarIfExists, but I'm unfortunately not (yet) too well versed with JavaScript:

function checkIfVarExists(vars, name) {
	// Author: Peter Ploß; 2020-01-02
	// check if a variable exists inside a list of variables
	// loop over all entries of the array and compare the name attribute
	// console.log ("looping over array, looking for {0}", name);
	var arr = vars.toArray();
	for (var i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
		if (arr[i].name == name) {
			return true;
		}
	}
	return false;
}

function returnVarIfExists(vars, name) {
	// Author: Peter Ploß; 2020-01-02
	// reutrn variable, if it exists inside a list of variables
	// console.log ("looping over array, looking for {0}", name);
	var arr = vars.toArray();
	for (var i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
		if (arr[i].name == name) {
			return arr[i];
		}
	}
	return false;
}

function findOrCreateVariable(scope, name) {
	// Author: Peter Ploß; 2020-01-03
	// The function returns the variable if it exists in either "variables" or "userVariables".
	// The function returns a newly craeted variblae in "userVariables", if it doesn't exist yet.
	var bExists;
	var bVerbose = false; // {true; false}

	// check if variable exists in "variables"
	bExists = checkIfVarExists(scope.failureRateData.variables, name);	
	// if it exists, then return it
	if (bExists) {
		if (bVerbose) console.log("variable {0} found in 'variables'", name);
		return returnVarIfExists(scope.failureRateData.variables, name);
	}

	// if it does not exist, then check if variable exists in "userVariables"
	bExists = checkIfVarExists(scope.failureRateData.userVariables, name);
	// if it exists, then return it
	if (bExists) {
		if (bVerbose) console.log("variable {0} found in 'userVariables'", name);
		return returnVarIfExists(scope.failureRateData.userVariables, name);
	}

	// finally create it in "userVariables" and return it
	if (bVerbose) console.log("variable {0} newly created in 'userVariables'", name);
	var newVar = Factory.createElement(scope, "FRVariable");
	newVar.name = name;
	return newVar;
}

I call this basically like shown in your example regarding "set derived to true":

...

			// only handle elements that may carry failure rate data
			if (!Metamodel.safetyModel.Failable.isInstance(element)) {
				return;
			}
			// only handle elements that have failure rate data
			if (!element.failureRateData) {
				return;
			}

			var sVar;
			var vVar;

			// add variable: Teta_U (operating temperature)
			sVar = "Teta_U";
			vVar = findOrCreateVariable(element, sVar);
			vVar.derived = true; // set to true, so that mission profile is taken into account

...

Best regards

Peter

medini_1036016653

ok, so it is possible to check for the returned value to be a "FR_VARIABLE" using "instanceof" (that went smoother than expected). This way the function needs to traverse the list of variables only once:

function findOrCreateVariable(scope, name) {
	// Author: Peter Ploß; 2020-01-03
	// The function returns the variable if it exists in either "variables" or "userVariables".
	// The function returns a newly craeted variblae in "userVariables", if it doesn't exist yet.
	var varIfExists; // {false; searchedForVariable}
	var bVerbose = true; // {true; false}

	// check if variable exists in "variables"
	varIfExists = returnVarIfExists(scope.failureRateData.variables, name);	
	// if it exists, then return it
	if (varIfExists instanceof FailureRateCatalogsPackage.Literals.FR_VARIABLE) {
		if (bVerbose) console.log("variable {0} found in 'variables'", name);
		return varIfExists;
	}

	// if it does not exist, then check if variable exists in "userVariables"
	varIfExists = returnVarIfExists(scope.failureRateData.userVariables, name);	
	// if it exists, then return it
	if (varIfExists instanceof FailureRateCatalogsPackage.Literals.FR_VARIABLE) {
		if (bVerbose) console.log("variable {0} found in 'userVariables'", name);
		return varIfExists;
	}

	// finally create it in "userVariables" and return it
	if (bVerbose) console.log("variable {0} newly created in 'userVariables'", name);
	var newVar = Factory.createElement(scope, "FRVariable");
	newVar.name = name;
	return newVar;
}

medini_1024169437

Thanks Peter for the snippets, I can for sure utilize that.

Note that i suggest not to mix return types like you did in "returnVarIfExists".

More precisely, better return "undefined" or "null" instead of "false".

Nice in Java Script if (!null) works the same as if (!undefined) or if (!false), all the same

Even if (!"") will execute, so null,undefined, false and "" evaluate to false.

Jan

medini_1024169437

Peter, I actually have an initial version ready which does what is should do.

I'll upload it to the well known place in a few moments.

Happy Scripting

Jan

medini_1036016653

Good morning Jan,

thank you for your hint. I was aware of this ugly implementation detail and will evaluate your suggestion.

Best regards

Peter

medini_1036016653

The new finderEx.js with its "findOrCreateVariable(scope, name)" works a treat. Thank you!

medini_1024169437

Cool, thanks for testing Peter

Happy Scripting in 2020

Jan

medini_1056767075

Hi Jan,

Is there some way to create an Element Library via Script using this library or if not, is there some other way?

Thanks,

John Paul