Comment 1 Thibault Landré 2010-08-12 05:05:26 EDT

Patch proposed by Mathieu

Comment 2 Mathieu Velten 2010-09-13 07:48:48 EDT

Created attachment 178733 [details]
use_case_reply

Comment 3 Mathieu Velten 2010-09-13 07:48:58 EDT

I changed back the behavior because I think the initial behavior is the correct one :
a reply message represents the return of a function, then it should use an operation from the source lifeline.
you can find attached a classic use case that was not possible to do anymore.

Comment 4 alanusse Mising name 2010-09-13 11:50:37 EDT

OK this behavior is correct
Actually, the reply message must be displayed with the return value of the operation called in the initial request.
In the first implementation, you proposed to select an operation name and you displayed this name in the message.
The right behavior is to display  the return argument.
In your initial implementation only the name of the operation was displayed without any return value, so it seemed that you were trying to call an operation of the part represented by second lifeline on the part represented by first lifeline.

Comment 5 Mathieu Velten 2010-09-14 04:41:26 EDT

this is already done since yesterday.
the current behavior is what you can see in the attachment.