[nanomsg] Re: Dealing with the state machines
- From: Garrett D'Amore <garrett@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 06:26:35 -0700
I like state machine usually, but the number and complexity of them in nanomsg
was something I found to be too high to my taste. When I approached writing
mangos, I took a different approach. There’s not much explicit FSM stuff in
mangos, as a result, and the code is pretty straight-forward.
- Garrett
> On Oct 31, 2014, at 12:42 AM, Paul Colomiets <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Martin
>
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 6:33 AM, Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> One feature that I would like to specifically point out is that
>> termination part of the state machine (which tends to be the most
>> messy part) is generated automatically with little or no help from the
>> programmer.
>>
>
> The "generated automatically" thing sounds bold. Do you mean the
> "cancel" clause helps? Or there are things, that I've not found by
> skimming ocumentation?
>
>> Should we use that to generate nanomsg state machines? Thoughts?
>> Ideas? Objections?
>>
>
> Given that there are state machine bugs, that nobody fixed for more
> than year, I'd say yes it would be nice. The downside is that it would
> be almost complete rewrite of nanomsg.
>
>
>
> --
> Paul
>
Other related posts:
