On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 1:16 PM, J.-F. Rompre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > My apologies if this is already provided, but I couldn't find it in the > current docs/FAQs/tutorials I looked at on the project site. > > Are the states internally reduced/optimized whenever possible ? <snip/>
No attempt is made at any reduction or optimization. > If, so > ideally this would be transparent to the client code/XML for verification > purposes. > <snap/> Yes, there are a host of considerations: * Transparency (as you indicate above) * Predictability (rules would have to be well documented) * Round-tripping (reduced vs. authored versions) * Semantics equivalence (proofs thereof) * Debugging * etc. (not a complete list) > As an example, an XML describing 100 states and many more possible > transitions, might be reduced to 30 states, but > no source XML changes would be needed (e.g. translation between defined and > optimized might occur in the Bridge). > <snip/> Possibly. > If not done internally, that would be a great capability to add, and would > allow Domain specifications to remain expressive. > <snap/> I suspect it is a modest amount of work, and there are no plans to do this within Commons SCXML. If someone else wants to do it and contribute back [1], we'd be happy to consider it as an enhancement. We'd probably need a basic mechanism to specify the domain specific reduction "rules" and a pre-parser to apply the rules (could be part of the bridging code as you mention or a more first-class notion within the library), while keeping the above considerations in mind to provide a reasonable development experience. -Rahul [1] http://commons.apache.org/scxml/issue-tracking.html > Thank you, > > JF > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
