RE: [boost] Re: Re: Finite state machine requirements

From: David Bergman (davidb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-05 19:33:29

Joel,

I feel sorry for you, if that used to be your life ;-)

/David

-----Original Message-----
From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Joel Young
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 8:25 PM
To: boost_at_[hidden]
Cc: jdy_at_[hidden]
Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Re: Finite state machine requirements

Sorry,

I won't be much help on this.  I have handcoded FSM a couple of times
for protocols and financial systems and I would like a nice clean
boostified FSM system to have in my backback, but I just can't
contribute.  :-(

I shouldn't even be talking about this interval stuff, but interval time
models used to be my life...

Joel
--------
From: "Andreas Huber" <spam2002_at_[hidden]>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 01:47:08 +0200
  To: boost_at_[hidden]
Subj: [boost] Re: Re: Finite state machine requirements

Joel,

You (I assume boost user) are one of a handful of people who have
expressed interest here but no one so far provided feedback on the
design of the proposed framework. I'm relatively new to FSMs (1.5 years
of heavy exposure) so I'd need at least two fairly experienced FSM profs
to critique the framework before I would even dare to carry on and
eventually submit to boost.

Regards,

Andreas
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost