RE: Ordering of steps in a subpipeline

> I think your second example is still broken, because it contains a
> loop.
> 
> Here's your example:
> 
> <p:group>
>   <p:output port="result">
>     <p:inline><doc/><p:inline>
>   </p:output>
>   <p:identity name="identity1">
>     <p:input port="source">
>       <p:pipe step="identity2" port="result"/>
>     </p:input>
>   </p:input>
>   <p:identity name="identity2"/>
> </p:group>
> 

Hmm, then I misunderstood what 'ordering of steps based on connections
between them' means. I thought that in this case, the processor would
detect that "identity1" explicitly depends on "identity1", and it would
therefore reverse the evaluation order of the steps. After that, it
would create the default bindings for the unbound input ports, options,
etc...

But maybe I just see it more complicated than it is.


Regards,
Vojtech