[boost] Re: review of proposed fsm library

From: Peter Petrov (ppetrov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-07 05:13:32

Dave Gomboc wrote:

 > The distinction made between state and state_machine, which I
 > consider to be unfortunate, was not justified in the rationale...

There is at least one good reason - the library supports both 
synchronous and asynchronous state machines, which are essentially 
different beasts and are operated quite differently. No such distinction 
exists for states, therefore they shouldn't be treated the same way as 
state machines. Otherwise you would be able to mix both synchronous and 
asynchronous states in one machine, which doesn't make sense.