W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > October to December 2005

Qry : SCXML State_Visit_Count issue ?

From: Sheth Raxit <raxit@phonologies.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 12:10:41 -0400
Message-Id: <200510191610.j9JGAf1W005047@mail26.atl.registeredsite.com>
To: <www-voice@w3.org>

Hello All,

Is SCXML have Any Mechanism of "State_Visit_Count" to Avoid 
Conditions like Infinite Loop (or To Restrict the Visit of some state of Current Context by Some number?)

Say for Example

States are like   P1 [S1(S11,S12,S13),S2,S3]

State P1 has sub-states  S1,S2,S3 
                 S1 has sub-states  S11,S12,S13

now on some Events Execution Flow is become infinite-loop
s11-->S12-->S13-->S11-->........(infinite loop)

(or any other sequence which results in infinite loop...or 

Exceed some Maximum Counts or some Maximum Time...)

Is there any Mechanism of State_Visit_Count (or Timer) is there by which one can control Infinite loop.

State_Visit_Count is the property of the State which will describe that Current State is Visited by Current Execution Context how many times. And I strongly believe that there is need of Explicit Specification so that SCXML App_Developers can use this property to gain more Control and Compatibility with multiple Vendors of SCXML. I think that this property should be MUST.

(This might be the critical issue for Real-Time systems...which may built using SCXML)

Waiting for Further Responses and Feedback,

Thanks and Regards
Raxit Sheth
Systems Software Engineer,
Phonologies India Private Ltd,
Tel: +91-22-22029732
Fax: +91-22-22029728

Phonologies (India) Private Limited
G-46 Dhanraj Mahal, Chh Shivaji Marg, Mumbai 39. INDIA.
Ph:+91-22-22029732  Fax:+91-22-22029728 mail@phonologies.com

****The information in this email is confidential and may be legally
privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by
anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any
disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken
in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful****
Received on Wednesday, 19 October 2005 16:15:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:07:38 UTC