Christophe Henry wrote:
Hi Michael,
Ok... I looked up MSM's anonymous transitions again and now I don't like it (o;
It's probably because we don't talk about the same concept. And it's not an MSM concept. Sorry, I can't claim ownership for it ;-) Anonymous transitions are also called completion events in the standard (and both names are used in the excellent "Real-Time UML, 3rd Edition").
Thank you for setting me straight on this. It should have dawned on me that they were completion transitions as described in 15.3.14. I have a love/hate feeling about them... I don't personally like the concept of leaving a state via implicit trigger. It just makes me feel uncomfortable. However, I also see the power they can afford and use them for exactly your example... stepping along algorithms. <snip>
What you are talking about is a trigger, which has to be fired, whatever it is. I didn't find it in the standard, but I could have missed that too. And no, MSM doesn't support it for the moment. The reason is that it's not on my radar as I'm pretty unconvinced of its need. I have yet to see a good convincing use case for it. Now, I don't say it won't be done, but it's not high on my list, unless someone makes a convincing case for it. Its implementation might be not trivial though.
Yes, it is the trigger. Sorry I got sloppy with the terminology. I hope to start sending some example machines and my perceptions later tonight. They will have several use-cases of these types of things. Right now I'm pushing on the edges of what I'm learning from the docs and a little bit of playing so I can determine how to convert basic constructs I use a lot from the model to the implementation. Thanks for putting up with me. michael -- ---------------------------------- Michael Caisse Object Modeling Designs www.objectmodelingdesigns.com