Hi Albert,
>Hi,
>
>I think that the
visitors and the flags ideas of the MSM are very generic and easy to
use.
>So, great!
>
>But, there is a way to define
multiple visitors for a single state (base)?
No.
>I think that it is not possible because the visitors mechanism is
based on a "simple/single typedef" and not on an "listed typedef"... isn't
it?
Yes.
>So, why the visitors are not like flags?
>I mean, why not to use an "accept_sig_list" instead of a single
"accept_sig"?
>Why is not possible a code like the following:
>
>struct my_visitable_state
>{
>
typedef mpl::vector< args<void,
VisitorType1&>, args<void,
VisitorType2&> > accept_sig_list;
>
> void accept(VisitorType1&) const {}
> void accept(VisitorType2&) const {}
>};
>
It is possible. It has not been done because the
interest in the visitor concept seems to have been (sadly) limited. This
feature is dates a bit (about 3 years ago), and I got, if my memory
is correct, exactly 2 questions about it (counting his one). This
makes improvements get a low priority. Actually the concept could also do
with a bit of redesign. For example args<void, SomeVisitor&,int>
would look much better if defined as args<void (SomeVisitor&,int)>.
If you would like to help, I'm interested ;-)
>By the way... I think that the usage of boost::ref() is not
propagated to the submachines...?
>I've found that when my state machine is also in a submachine, the
visitor of the state machine is passed by reference, but the
>submachine is passed always by value... is this a bug?
>(just using a pointer solved my needs, so just to
report...)