The question at the beginning of every new script in ARIS is: Should I fulfill the requirements per report (.arx) or macro (.amx)?
First, we should clarify where the differences between the two options actually lie:).
A report
- is executed on server
- every time complex analyses are created
- if objects are navigated to
The creation of a convenient analysis in Word, PDF or Excel can only be realized via a report. The navigation of ARIS objects in the database is easier and more efficient than with a macro (which is complicated and expensive due to frequent server calls, run time). Usually, each individual macro command results in a server call, which considerably increases the run time compared to a report. This is the case, if e.g. we determine all of the functions of a model and its assigned models and specify an attribute for them.
A macro
- is executed on client
- should only be used if client functionalities are automated
The change of content, such as the color of an object occurrence, is only possible in the open model per macro. Furthermore, Swing dialogs (e.g. from their own JARs) can only be used in macros, in addition to the dialog functionalities provided in ARIS.
Exclusion criteria: For evaluations that include the creation of output you should use a report. However, if you want to work with an open model then this is only possible via a macro.
Note: This article describe how to develop a report in ARIS. See this post for links to similar articles.