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
2660 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
Parents
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
Reply
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
Children
No Data