Home General

How to prevent deleting of a component with RAP code associated with it?

edited January 2011 in General
Hello,
I would like to be able to prevent the user from deleting of a component,
which has some RAP code associated with it. How to determine such components
explains the article "How To...Find Components With RAP Code", but I'm
looking for a way to execute that check, when the user wants to delete a
component. If there is RAP code associated with it, he should be warned and
the component should remain or get deleted depending on users decission.

There seems to be no such event in the designer... Something like
"OnCanDeleteComponent" or so... How can I achieve this?

Regards,
Mark

Comments

  • edited January 2011
    Hi Mark,

    The designer does not offer any method to prevent the user from deleting a
    component. This restriction is something we are considering for a later
    release. Currently your users will need to be aware which components could
    cause RAP issues. Otherwise, you could loop through all the RAP code before
    generating the report and deleting any code associated with non-present
    components.



    Regards,

    Nico Cizik
    Digital Metaphors
    http://www.digital-metaphors.com

    Best Regards,

    Nico Cizik
    Digital Metaphors
    http://www.digital-metaphors.com
  • edited January 2011
    Hi Nico,

    glad to read, that you consider this for one of the future releases.

    To your suggestion: I thought it's not possible to determine via RAP, which
    components are present and which are not?


  • edited January 2011
    Hi Mark,

    I was more thinking you would search the RAP source text for component
    references that do not exist. This was more a suggestion to remove the
    possibility of any code conflicts if an end-user deletes a component that
    may be used elsewhere in RAP code.



    Regards,

    Nico Cizik
    Digital Metaphors
    http://www.digital-metaphors.com

    Best Regards,

    Nico Cizik
    Digital Metaphors
    http://www.digital-metaphors.com
  • edited February 2011
    Hi Nico,

    then I've misunderstood that, sorry :)
    Thank you for youre reply.

    Mark

This discussion has been closed.