Hello Pavel, Sunday, December 17, 2006, 11:28:26 PM, you wrote:
"Andrey Semashev" wrote:
[ snip differences between Boost.Statechart and the proposed FSM ]
That being said, I may only purpose my implementation as a lightweight addition to the Boost.Statechart aimed to solve performance and simplicity issues for small and light FSMs. Is there any need in such?
The Statechart library is named as is not to give impression that this is the only possible FSM implementation in Boost.
So, is that a "yes" answer?
-------------
An interesting idea had bubbled up during the review - a FSM that could be "hidden" within a class and would simplify internals of the class.
Something like that was described on: http://www.codeproject.com/cpp/statebased.asp but this implementation is IMHO too complicated for the end user.
Actually, the case in the article is quite common in my practice - I have an interface or a class that I'd rather implement as FSM. That's why I added a simplified events support based on tuples. Though, I couldn't find any automatic way to translate interface method calls into events except by hand or with a code generator. -- Best regards, Andrey mailto:andysem@mail.ru