[boost] Re: FSM Review

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-13 06:02:59

Matthew Vogt <mattvogt_at_[hidden]> writes:

> 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?

So what?

I think Alexander's does allow dispersed machines, FWIW.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com