Re: [boost] [msm] eUML guard/action location

Subject: Re: [boost] [msm] eUML guard/action location
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-14 06:47:33

On Dec 9, 2009, at 8:22 AM, Adam Merz wrote:

> Stewart, Robert writes:
>> 
>> Here's another suggestion, though it breaks from the logical UML ordering
>> Michael posted previously:
>> 
>>   DestState() = CurrentState() + cool_event()[guard()]/(action())
>> 
> 
> Here's another +1 for this. Not having a strong background with UML, but 
> preferring eUML to the standard frontend, I find this arrangement much more 
> logical.

Are all those parentheses used for optional arguments, or could we consider eliminating them?

--
David Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://boostpro.com