Appian Community
Site
Search
Sign In/Register
Site
Search
User
DISCUSS
LEARN
SUCCESS
SUPPORT
Documentation
AppMarket
More
Cancel
I'm looking for ...
State
Not Answered
Replies
9 replies
Subscribers
7 subscribers
Views
2645 views
Users
0 members are here
Share
More
Cancel
Related Discussions
Home
»
Discussions
»
General
Limitation on missing dependencies in an application
aayusha
Certified Senior Developer
over 7 years ago
I have a process model (A) with an script task, and in the output node I have used a rule inside an apply. For example, apply(rule!doSomething,pv!myArray).
Now when I create a package process model (A), and check for missing precedents this rule (rule!doSomething) does not appear.
However, if I check the precedents of the process model, I get this rule in the list.
Is there any limitations on the missing precedents functionality?
What if we use the apply in interface, would missing precedents ignore that or is it just with process models?
OriginalPostID-245204
Discussion posts and replies are publicly visible
0
Tom Ryan
Appian Employee
over 7 years ago
Can you confirm which version of Appian you are seeing this behavior in?
Cancel
Vote Up
0
Vote Down
Sign in to reply
Verify Answer
Cancel
0
aayusha
Certified Senior Developer
over 7 years ago
16.2
Cancel
Vote Up
0
Vote Down
Sign in to reply
Verify Answer
Cancel
0
abhinavg712
Certified Lead Developer
over 7 years ago
@Aaysuha, if the rule being used as :
apply(rule!doSomething( ruleInputArray:_),pv!myArray), it will be picked up in dependency check
The same is true for the other looping functions
Cancel
Vote Up
0
Vote Down
Sign in to reply
Verify Answer
Cancel
0
aayusha
Certified Senior Developer
over 7 years ago
@abhinavg712 @Tom, shouldn't the missing precedents work in both ways?
I understand the method mentioned by abhinavg712 will work, but ideally I think it should work both ways.
@Tom, is it a known thing? Or can we raise an enhancement on this?
Cancel
Vote Up
0
Vote Down
Sign in to reply
Verify Answer
Cancel
0
Tom Ryan
Appian Employee
over 7 years ago
It seems this issue occurs when the process model is not yet published. Can you publish the model and check whether you get the same result.
Cancel
Vote Up
0
Vote Down
Sign in to reply
Verify Answer
Cancel
0
aayusha
Certified Senior Developer
over 7 years ago
@tom, Ideally publishing shouldn't be required as I am trying to export the process model from TEST environment to a higher environment and the process works fine in TEST.
On publishing the process model and packaging, the rule is still not in missing precedents.
Cancel
Vote Up
0
Vote Down
Sign in to reply
Verify Answer
Cancel
0
Tom Ryan
Appian Employee
over 7 years ago
After further investigation it appears there is inconsistent behavior here for missing precedents depending on the syntax used for apply().
Until this is resolved, the issue can be worked around by using the previously suggested syntax for apply like:
apply(rule!doSomething( ruleInputArray:_),pv!myArray)
Cancel
Vote Up
0
Vote Down
Sign in to reply
Verify Answer
Cancel
0
aayusha
Certified Senior Developer
over 7 years ago
@Tom, Can I get an enhancement reference number?
Cancel
Vote Up
0
Vote Down
Sign in to reply
Verify Answer
Cancel
0
Tom Ryan
Appian Employee
over 7 years ago
AN-58201
Cancel
Vote Up
0
Vote Down
Sign in to reply
Verify Answer
Cancel