Hi Nishan,

If I understand what you want to do here: which is use a Data Transform to set local values in a calling Activity - I don't think there is any way that you could achieve currently.

In your case: I think the only solution is make a copy of the Final Activity in question (effectively re-implementing the Activity in a way that suits your requirements): or logging a request to GCS  - so see whether this Activity could be 'de-finalized' (if that is feasible and a doesn't have other consequences down the line somehow).

Cheers

John

I could be wrong in this : but here's what I tried: and my findings to show why I came to this conclusion:

I tried to create a simple Data Transform that sets a Local scope variable - the Designer Studio prevents me from doing this:

Furthermore the 'Parameters' Tab for a Data Transform doesn't let me define any Local scoped values (unlike Activities):

Compare that to an Activity,

So on the Params tab; we can define a Local scoped variable : 'a' of type 'String':

And on the Steps tab we then use a Property-Set step to set the value of 'Local.a':

This saves without issue - and (even though I didn't actually run it : I expect it will work).

Now we take a look at the Generated Java for this Activity:

And search for declaration of our local variable; this is what we find:

public void initializeStandardLocalVariables() {
        nextBlock = "";
        pz_Status = true;
        pz_methodStatusUpdated = false;
        debugIsOn = false;
        forEachCounter = 0;
        pz_forEachSkipClass = 0;
        infEngine = null;
        nextProperty = null;
        pz_CurrentRuleKey = "";
        pz_CurrentCircumstance = "";
        pz_CurrentStepNum = "";
        pz_CurrentTraceInfo = null;
        pz_thisPageClass = "";
        pz_Dictionary = null;
        statusReturnedFromNestedLoop = "";
    }

    public String a = "";
[...]

So, here's my understanding here of why you can't (currently at least) do this in PRPC:

1. Data Transforms don't seem to have any concept of a Local variable - there is nothing on the Params tab, and the syntax Local.variable is not understand.

2. The Local variables defined on Activities are scoped strictly to the Activity itself: they are implemented by defining a Java Field within a Class when the Rule is saved/assembled.

I *guess* what you are after might make a good enhancement: but you would need to 'spec' out exactly how this mechanism would work.

How would the Data Transform know which Local Scoped variables it is able to modify ? (the Design-Time Form would have to contain something that made it aware of calling Activity in order to know what Locals is allowed to modify : or else it would have be totally 'liberal' in what it allows: and then you are trading a design-time syntax-check for a runtime-check (what to do when a non-scoped 'local' isn't available ?)

But then: this is probably the main reason for having a Parameter Page - to avoid having to 'leak' Local Variables from Rule-To-Rule...so it's dubious that an enhancement would bring much additional flexibility here... (but maybe it would ? dunno).

Random follow-up notes:

It is notable that the Local 'a' in the example has a 'public' modifier: so in *theory* outside Java Classes can 'get to it' : but they would still need knowledge of the enclosing scope to know that it exists...

It is also telling that the error you get when trying to save a Data Transform that contains a 'Set' action for a 'Local.<variable>' syntax gives this:

This record has 1 Error in 1 place
—
Test compilation failed: ----------
1. ERROR in /Rule_Obj_Model_Gcs_scratch_Work_TestDT_Model_20160603T155957_547_GMT.java (at line 60)
a = "hello";
^
a cannot be resolved to a variable

That is: it appears that the DT does recognize the 'local' prefix, - because the error has managed to parse it out; it essentially knows we are trying to modify a local variable - it's just that the variable happens to not exist; and we have no way of defining any.

Even IF there was a way of setting up a Local Variable on the Params tab of the DT: that wouldn't solve any issues though: you still wouldn't be able to pass in any Local Variables.

The more I think about this: I actually think its a good thing that DTs (or any other called rule) cannot try and modify the Local Scoped variables of the calling variables : this could lead to very difficult to debug issues.....