Re: component with no inputs

/ Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
| May be it is a kind of strange question, but, did we say something
| about the order of component evaluation ?
|
| I just read
|
| "The result of evaluating a pipeline is the result of evaluating the
| steps that it contains, in the order determined by the connections
| between them"

So we do say *something* :-) And the computation of options and
parameters can contribute to the connections.

| We have p:load and p:error that have no input
| Since p:load has output, we can determine an order for evaluation (not
| a total order)

Right. I'm not sure we have to specify a total order.

| But this is not true for p:error
| does this mean that we can throw the error anywhen
| so a clever implementation would throw it first
| so it means that when you have an error step, it is useful to now that
| no step at same level would be executed

Yes, I think it could. I don't expect p:error to be used very often
except inside p:choose. A p:error with siblings is a bit...odd.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Art happens--no hovel is safe from it,
http://nwalsh.com/            | no prince may depend upon it, and
                              | vastest intelligence cannot bring it
                              | about.--J. M. Whistler