Re: [boost] [msm] scalability

Subject: Re: [boost] [msm] scalability
From: David Abrahams (dave.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-13 12:06:17

On Jan 12, 2010, at 6:59 PM, Christophe Henry <christophe.j.henry_at_[hidden] 
 > wrote:

> I think the trade-off is
> likely to be not so much against run-time but UML features. I'm think
> about transition conflicts. This one is pretty hard on the compiler.
> I'd  also bet on submachines and entry/exit pseudo states.

The idea would be to do all parts that are “hard on the compiler”  
at runtime. I don't see why you should have to sacrifice features.

Sent from my iPhone