Re: [boost] Re: FSM Review

From: Matthew Vogt (mattvogt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-13 05:05:07

David Abrahams wrote:

>>This library seems to differ - it appears that there are criticisms
>>of the library's performance characteristics, but no-one is pointing
>>to alternative libraries that solve these problems (albeit they may
>>be deficient in other ways).  Similarly, I haven't noticed any
>>suggestions for specific techniques that might be used to improve
>>the performance of the current submission.
> 
> 
> To the contrary, in previous threads I have posted several examples of
> small FSM libraries with either O(1) or O(#outgoing transitions)
> dispatch.  Alexander Nasonov has also posted some examples using a
> very different approach.
> 

These techniques do not address the issues of state machines dispersed across 
multiple translation units, or support for orthogonal states, do they?

Matt