Dynamic Component issue - feature or bug?

I have been playing around with DCs a little. The concept is pretty cool, but the implementation less so…
Or maybe my understanding is to blame?
I do understand that a parametric concept has its limitations, but this is not the issue here.

XXX_A.skp (15.8 KB) XXX_B.skp (20.5 KB)

Consider these two very simple attached DCs: XXX_A and XXX_B. They are identical except for one small thing: the formula inside the “Dim” field.

XXX_A is well-behaving in the sense that when you drag it in from the Component tray, a new instance is created (as it should).

XXX_B is not so, when you drag it in from the Component tray a new component definition is created (which we would rather not have).

In XXX_A the field “Dim” carries no formula content, while is XXX_B the field carries the formula

=CONCATENATE(“A” , " x ", “B”)

It appears that it is the text function CONCATENATE() that causes the latter component to misbehave in the described sense. (I made the simplest use of CONCATENATE() that I could think of.)

Surely the CONCATENATE() function is meant to be used in the context of a DC, why would it otherwise be present in the function list??

Anyone to enlighten me? Anyone from Trimble here???

For the record, I am using DC version
the latest I know of.

You can stop the redraw by placing the formula in the sub level, however it would seem a bit pointless as any changes to the other attributes would make the component unique anyway. XXX_B. test sub.skp (28.5 KB)

Does it matter if the components have a #number?
There are many ways to create a report despite this, using the component instance name, the component info “Name” or your own custom attribute and use that instead of the definition name in the “group by” area.
If you use the component instance name, the attribute title and option title update as well, after insertion of an instance provided you don not use the “Name” attribute

Ah… that was exactly what I was after, I just did not realize that I could obtain this
by moving the formula to the sub-level and just reference from the top level.
Is this behavior clearly stated somewhere or do everyone has to “discover” this by himself?

Thanks for contributing to my understanding… I probably have more “discoveries” waiting for me…