Re: Preemption in Test 403c

Hi Jim,

Thanks for your explanation. Much clearer now.

So just to confirm, the transition attribute ``conf:targetfail=""`` in the
event1 transition of p0s3 is considered to specify a transition out of s0
(presumably into ``conf:fail``)?



On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Jim Barnett <1jhbarnett@gmail.com> wrote:

> The transition in P0s4 is a targetless transition, and thus has an empty
> exit set and does not conflict with any other transition. Therefore it is
> never preempted.   For the same reason, the transition in p0s1 is not
> preempted.
>
> The transition for event1 in p0s3 has a non-empty exit set (namely s0 and
> all its children), so it conflicts with and is preempted by the transition
> in p0s2.  For event2 the transtion in p0s3 also conflicts with the
> transition in p0s2, but in this case it does the preempting (since
> transitions in descendents preempt transitions in ancestors.)
>
>
> On 7/30/2014 10:09 PM, Markus Weiland wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can someone please explain, in test case 403c, why the transition for
>> "event1" is supposed to be preempted by p0s2 for the first transition in
>> p0s3, but is not supposed to be preempted for the same "event1" for the
>> catchall transition in p0s4?
>>
>> In other words, what makes the transition in p0s3 different from the
>> transition in p0s4 so that it gets preempted? Also, for the sake of
>> understanding, is the transition for "event1" in p0s1 preempted?
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>
> --
> Jim Barnett
> Genesys
>
>