> >I could be convinced if I see a possible mechanism that deals with
> >the command coupling problem and state storage problem.
> >  
> >
> Jing, it is sounding more and more like what you want is a scripting 
> control flow language expressed in XML.  That is absolutely, totally, 
> *not* what commons-chain is about.  Feel free to invent your own package 
> for this purpose.  Feel free to popularize it all you want.  You're even 
> welcome to say "this is an extension to commons-chain that supports 
> branches and labels".  But commons-chain itself is going to stay focused 
> on the pure CoR pattern, which has absolutely no notion of branches or 
> labels in the fundamental APIs.  Such things, therefore, do not belong 
> in the fundamental commons-chain APIs.
> 
> I'm not going to bother to respond to any further discussion along this 
> line -- as far as I'm concerned, the case for adding branches and labels 
> has failed to illustrate that it has any technical merit (for 
> commons-chain), and I'm not interested in spending any more time 
> discussing it.  What you do in your own projects (open source or not) 
> is, of course, totally up to you.

I would agree we put the discussion aside because the idea
behind "branch behavior" is premature. I also agree the rational that
we do it all the way or do not do it at all. The "branch behavior"
gives us something that is done only half way.

When you roll back (no branches), the command coupling problem
through states is *my* (the chain designer) problem or is *my* fault
by definition if the new command is not correctly coupled with other
commands. This raises another question: How many chances
this command could be reused in another chain in general? I do not
believe we are going to have a clear answer very soon. Practice might
tell us. So, I put it on hold for further study of the chain's behaviors
until more feedback come from practices.

> Craig

Jing


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to