[e-lang] Reference-state diagram

[David Hopwood]

Mark Miller wrote:
> Ka-Ping Yee wrote:
> 
>> I'm puzzled by the arrow from the remote promise to the broken
>> reference in the figure.  [...]
>>
>> 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. [...]
> 
> Your diagram above is much closer to the way I had been drawing it: See 
> the diagram at the bottom of 
> <http://www.erights.org/elib/concurrency/refmech.html>.
> 
> I changed it for this paper to emphasize the two causes of these state 
> transitions (resolution vs partition), rather than simply what can turn 
> into what.

I don't think that helps. I was also puzzled by the diagram for the same reason
as ?!ng. It doesn't succeed in calling attention to the causes of transitions
without explanatory text -- and if you had that text, I think the diagram
above (or the second one at <http://www.erights.org/elib/concurrency/refmech.html>)
would be clearer.

-- 
David Hopwood <david.nospam.hopwood at blueyonder.co.uk>