On Thursday 29 January 2004 13:37, Alex Karasulu wrote: > Leo, > > Ok this is getting too complex for me. I figured a MutableConfiguration is > one that can change regardless of who is doing the changing. We have to > presume anything can be inducing the change. Any time a configuration > changes the component responds to those changes whether or not it itself > has induced those changes.
And then we are back to "Reconfigurable" discussion = not enough of semantics defined, blah, blah blah. Please not Confuse State from Configuration, which I feel is being intermingled to a great degree in this whole thread. Before discussing all this nitty details, back to drawing board; WHAT is needed? WHY is that needed? HOW can such need be satisfied? What are the CONSEQUENCES of such change? What are the SEMANTICS surrounding such change? I have a bit of problem filtering the "implementation noise" and therefor have problem to partake in the discussion. It seems that somewhere, LS has identified a need and then concluded, making this change will satisfy such need, and every participant (LS & Alex, anyone else?) has been discussing the implementation. I would like to get some underlying understanding of the basics Cheers Niclas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
