Subject: [boost] Two FSM libraries, one interface
From: Christophe Henry (christophe.j.henry_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-07 10:34:24
>Anyway, I just got tired of being a grumpy old passive man, so decided to put some of my money
>(or time) where my mouth is. I will write more about this side effect of my analysis in a blog post later
I find it great and worth of respect that you spent time making a
useful contribution to the discussion by going the extra mile (or even
2-3) to present your point.
While I am by no mean a friend of the preprocessor, I find your
solution interesting and encourage you to push it a bit further by
supporting at least guards.
If you allow a few comments:
- I suggest you to give the action a name because you won't always
manage to name an action actState1EventState2, for example with 2
transitions with the same source and target.
- this would also remove the need for direct code writing, which could
break the preprocessor
- What about adding some entry/exit? I'm sure you manage to pack this one too.
Otherwise I find the idea surprising but fun and think that it could
gain being pushed a bit further. If you do, you could even tempt me to
reuse it in an eUML front-end ;-)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk