This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
hekate:xtt2 [2008/12/22 16:09] wojnicki rule-rule links comment |
hekate:xtt2 [2019/06/27 15:49] (current) |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 234: | Line 234: | ||
| A table provides a //visual// representation of rules, as below. | A table provides a //visual// representation of rules, as below. | ||
| - | {{xttp-table-new.png|XTT table new format}} | + | {{xttp-table-new.png|XTT table new format}} FIXME |
| Rules in the table are interpreted one by one in a given way (see [[hekate:xtt2#Inference]]), this is the Table Inference. | Rules in the table are interpreted one by one in a given way (see [[hekate:xtt2#Inference]]), this is the Table Inference. | ||
| Line 360: | Line 360: | ||
| tables can be fired in any way, | tables can be fired in any way, | ||
| as long as this contstraint holds. | as long as this contstraint holds. | ||
| + | |||
| + | FIXME: iw: not really there might be more than one table with input attributes (or ro, rw) in the condition parts, it might be not doable to infer which table should be run first. | ||
| + | There might be an algorithm implemented which finds an order of execution (which table to start with), but any conditions using a N/D value can screw it. | ||
| + | I'd suggest choosing an entry table, the one that the inference process starts with, explicitly. | ||
| ==== Interpreter Scenarios ==== | ==== Interpreter Scenarios ==== | ||
| Line 447: | Line 451: | ||
| * communication (comm) (S <-> E) | * communication (comm) (S <-> E) | ||
| Arrows indicate the System/Environment interaction. | Arrows indicate the System/Environment interaction. | ||
| + | |||
| + | FIXME: iw: what's happened to ''ro, rw, wo, state'' classes? | ||
| Discuss ideas here: [[hekatedev:xtt2#Attribute Classes]]. | Discuss ideas here: [[hekatedev:xtt2#Attribute Classes]]. | ||
