Problem defining more than one action with the same transition path about jssm HOT 6 CLOSED

closing here because you're chatting there

from jssm.

One of the solutions could be something like this one:

State_A ['action_a', 'action_b'] -> State_B;

from jssm.

Because there's a whole bunch of tools, we use the issue tracker on the fsl repo.

This is tracked as StoneCypher/fsl#325

If I'm mistaken and this is different, do me a favor and open an issue over there explaining why it isn't 325

Close this issue if/when you agree that this is 325

from jssm.

Anyway as it stands right now, FSL disallows multiple edges between two states. The easiest workaround is to have a landing state to catch them and to carry on from there.

I'll prioritize automatic successor states so that this won't impact you much

from jssm.

Yeah, to make it more semantic, I've implemented 'auto' action, so that SM factory will automatically process it and move to the next state.
Like so:

a 'do' -> b;
a 'dotoo' -> c 'auto' -> b;

Or even so:

a 'do' -> a;
a 'dotoo' -> b 'auto' -> a;

But again, I guess having multiple actions would make code much more clean.

from jssm.

I agree that this is a desirable thing

The reason I'm dragging my heels is that a huge portion of the codebase is written with the assumption that you can ask the machine for the edge between a and b, and get an unambiguous answer

To do this would break that, which is a massive breaking change and also would mean a whole bunch of stuff would need to move to being container based, which would probably slow things down by an order of ten

I have kicked around the idea of saying "it'll return the main path and only main path has this restriction" but that still breaks older machines written without main paths

I'm still thinking over what I think is the right thing to do here

Would you be okay with my closing this, and talking on StoneCypher/fsl#325 instead, please? There are ~30 repos and it's hard to keep track of things if they're not all in the same place

from jssm.