On 20/02/12 02:11, Herman Bruyninckx wrote:
> If I understand correctly what you mean, my short answer is "yes"! The
> Coordinator just does the event processing, and most of the events
> resulting from this will trigger re-configurations of the components that
> process the data flow. In other words, there is no need for the FSM to do
> the data flow itself. Take the obvious example of the Board of a company:
> their decisions are not processing the data in the company itself, but are
> giving signals to the upper management to change something in the way the
> whole company deals with its data (or products, for that matter).
> That's also the reason why a good manager can job-hop to companies with
> very different activities without much problems: his coordination skills
> are reusable, even with limited domain knowledge :-)
This is the approach we take. It works well so far, both for "good" and
"bad" events. It does have the disadvantage, which Ingo also pointed
out, that the components either need to be designed with the method in
mind or need to be some form of stateless. In my opinion, however, if
you are doing proper loose coupling then it's not *that* special, so
components that are not designed like that probably need fixing. ;)
Geoff
(text/plain)