on Sat Aug 16 2008, Michael Caisse <boost-AT-objectmodelingdesigns.com> wrote:
While the term state machine can mean a lot of things, I'm not sure that the ad-hoc implementation would represent what we all have in mind. For example, according to your fsm.png diagram the only valid transition from the Attached state is to Powered. However, nothing stops me from simply calling the set_address method which will result in either a Default or Configured state.
He intentionally described that as undefined behavior.
Even an ad-hoc state machine implementation should have some type of "tick" or "clock" type method that takes a token or message (with or without payload).
I can't picture what you have in mind here.
So, while your ad-hoc machine will track a state if the methods are called in a valid order, I'm not sure I would refer to it as a state machine.
I would. It's certainly no less valid than the one presented in C++TMP. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com