[e-lang] Reference-state diagram

Ka-Ping Yee e-lang at zesty.ca
Thu Jun 30 01:41:58 EDT 2005


I'm puzzled by the arrow from the remote promise to the broken
reference in the figure.  The dashed arrow on the lower left
suggests that local or remote promises can transition to any other
kind of live reference.  If that is so, why draw the arrow from
the remote promise to the broken reference?  This arrow may be
misleading -- it initially suggested to me that only remote
promises could be broken.

What do you think of this?

      unresolved           resolved
    .------------.       .------------.
    |            |       |   near     |
    |            |       |            |
    |   local    |       |            |
    |     ^      |------>|            |
    |     |      |       |            |
    |     v      |       |            |
    |   remote   |       |   far      |
    '------------'       |    |       |
                         |    v       |
                         |   broken   |
                         '------------'

I find this logic easier to follow, and i think it represents
all the same transitions.  (I think the loopy arrow in the lower
left was initially intimidating/puzzling to me.)

Alternatively, depending on what you want to emphasize, it might
be even better to draw the transition arrow from eventual to broken.
That makes it clear what kinds of references can be broken.


-- ?!ng


More information about the e-lang mailing list