Darryl Green wrote:
On a vaguely related note - I have a question about in-state transitions. There is an example of a custom reaction to do this. However, there is no provision for an action associated with this transition. Obviously it is possible to write the action (or call it) as part of the custom reaction, but this seems irregular for a library that is trying to map directly from/to UML. My eyes glazed over a bit trying to follow the transition handling code to add some sort of an in_state_transition<> but the concept seems trivial enough. Having this facility means that the same action can be used for an in-state transition as for other transitions, which seems only reasonable, and the similar declaration should make developing/modifying a state's transitions easier.
I briefly considered this, but rejected it because in-state reactions can relatively nicely be implemented with custom_reactions. However, it does have advantages readability-wise. I'll work out the details and get back to you...
For that matter, I suppose the transition could actually specialise for the particular case of a transition back to the source state, and no special declaration would be needed?
No, that would be wrong. UML requires that in a self-transition the exit and the entry action is called (see StopWatch for an example where such a transition makes sense). This is not the case for an in-state reaction. Regards, Andreas