Thanks for the clarification, I didn't about them. 

Now I need even more reading and thinking :)

> Le 18 mai 2015 à 22:23, Marc Fawzi <[email protected]> a écrit :
> 
> Back to composability
> 
> I read about stacked vs hierarchical FSMs and it looks like what you want is 
> a stacked one not a hierarchical one... Subgraphs dont  have to be entangled 
> with the global graph
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On May 18, 2015, at 10:26 AM, Khalid Jebbari <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> I like how you break up the state machines, it has sense in web app. Page 1 
>> has 2 widgets, page 2 has a form. Each widget/form can have a FSM associated 
>> with it, the higher level FSM knowing just the higher level state of all 
>> widget displayed. Mmmh... Interesting. 
>> 
>>> Le 18 mai 2015 à 19:13, Daniel Kersten <[email protected]> a écrit :
>>> 
>>> From my understanding of it:
>>> 
>>> Use higher level states and decouple them somewhat from the data.
>>> 
>>> For example, games do have lots of dynamically changing data. In a modern 
>>> shooter you might have dozens of characters with positions, orientation, 
>>> velocity, health information, weapons, ammunition, etc all of which can be  
>>> constantly changing. And that's just taking the characters into account.
>>> 
>>> I wouldn't go and build a state machine that enumerates all of the possible 
>>> transitions from a "twelve characters with done distribution of attributes 
>>> in this location moving in that direction" state. I'd break it down so that 
>>> each character has a high level state like "seeking powerup" or "running".
>>> 
>>> Probably not a great example although it does illustrate that you might 
>>> have a hierarchy of state machines. In the game example, the highest level 
>>> might be something like "in play" or "paused" and the lowest might be an 
>>> each characters "firing weapon".
>>> 
>>> In client side web app, you could say that each configuration of data is a 
>>> state (the re-frame readme mentions that you could think of the app-db like 
>>> this), but I think that's too fine grained to be useful.
>>> 
>>> Instead I'd define higher level states (possibly in a hierarchy). I'd ask 
>>> myself, regardless of the data available, what are the logical states that 
>>> a user could be in and for each one, what are the actions that they can 
>>> perform (and what state does each action transition them to). 
>>> This could be as simple as pages and links, but with a rich single page 
>>> application it's more likely finer grained than that. Maybe what dialogs or 
>>> widgets are accessible.
>>> 
>>> Again, you could then layer these into a hierarchy of state machines.
>>> 
>>> One advantage of this is you always know what a user can do at any given 
>>> time because you can look at what state they're in.
>>> 
>>> I think of FSM states as orthogonal to the data, not as the data itself. 
>>> The states dictate what data is accessible and what can be done to it; the 
>>> data doesn't dictate what state the application is in.
>>> 
>>> I suppose terminology gets confusing, but this is the approach I'm toying 
>>> with. I'll see how that goes :)
>>> 
>>> But yeah, needs more thinking.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, 18 May 2015 16:55 Marc Fawzi <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Games are ideal candidate for straight-forward FSM implementation since 
>>>> you normally download the data at game load time and from there on you 
>>>> have a *relatively* small set of states that can be transitioned between 
>>>> based in user input. You can even apply state minimization techniques to 
>>>> reduce the total number of states.
>>>> 
>>>> But in a web app you are continuously grabbing data from the server and 
>>>> that data is generated based on not only user input but also the state of 
>>>> the server side database and that server generated data would modify UI 
>>>> side app state and you have to account for all possibilities so the total 
>>>> number of states could grow wildly if your UI is data driven (where the 
>>>> state of the UI depends on the data in non-trivial ways) but even if your 
>>>> UI state dependence on server data was a trivial relationship you could 
>>>> still end up with a huge state diagram for the simplest viable business 
>>>> app if you include templating the view as part of the UI FSM on top of 
>>>> business logic. You could segment your app into micro apps and that will 
>>>> help regardless of whether you're building the app as FSM or not.
>>>> 
>>>> And what if the state transitions are probability driven? How many states 
>>>> will you end up having to chart?
>>>> 
>>>> Not convinced YET...
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> 
>>>> > On May 18, 2015, at 6:57 AM, Sean Tempesta <[email protected]> 
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi Khalid.  I found your topic interesting so I thought I'd chime in.  
>>>> > Regarding your comments on routing:
>>>> >
>>>> > So, under normal conditions, the initial URL sets the FSM in motion (as 
>>>> > an event).  We could call this entry point a routing state.  Afterward, 
>>>> > the state transitions are controlling the urls (not the other way 
>>>> > around), right?
>>>> >
>>>> > Outside of normal conditions (ie. people copying and pasting links into 
>>>> > random parts of the system), you also just send the url to the routing 
>>>> > state and then switch to a new state based on whatever rules and 
>>>> > definitions you've set.
>>>> >
>>>> > Or maybe I'm missing something.  I haven't built an FSM in a while.  :)
>>>> >
>>>> > Sean
>>>> >
>>>> >> On Monday, May 18, 2015 at 6:07:22 PM UTC+8, Khalid Jebbari wrote:
>>>> >> Trying to push forward the discussion about Web UI with state machines. 
>>>> >> I came up with the following decomposition of the core components of a 
>>>> >> web application :
>>>> >>
>>>> >> - application state
>>>> >> - application data
>>>> >> - business logic
>>>> >> - ui logic
>>>> >> - event processing
>>>> >> - presentation layer
>>>> >> - routing
>>>> >>
>>>> >> In this schema, I think the application state is the real core, because 
>>>> >> every other components is directly related to it, at least if you use a 
>>>> >> state machine. I came up with the following model.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> - application data : related to application state because both can 
>>>> >> easily represented as data. If we want a web app that is completely 
>>>> >> state-driven (I want this, for debugging, testing and time-travel 
>>>> >> capabilities), simply merge the data and the state in the same data 
>>>> >> entity.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> - business logic/ui logic : in a state machine there's the notion of 
>>>> >> "actions" executed with each transition (where necessary). So the logic 
>>>> >> could just be executed by the state machine itself.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> - event processing : a state machine can be event-driven, and this a 
>>>> >> perfect match with a web app since the web (and any UI for that matter) 
>>>> >> is inherently event driven. So the event/input of the state machine 
>>>> >> could just match the event triggered by the user, as well as custom 
>>>> >> events if necessary.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> - presentation layer : simply display the current app-state as 
>>>> >> HTML/CSS. In the React.js model, it would simply mean updating the app 
>>>> >> state and letting React render everything.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> - routing : this is where stuff gets complicated in my mind. In a 
>>>> >> proper application, lot of state is derived from the URLs. But not all 
>>>> >> state, for instance whether a modal is displayed or not, or whether a 
>>>> >> form is validated client side or not isn't tied to a URL. Which tend to 
>>>> >> let me think that there's some kind of hierarchy in the state machine. 
>>>> >> The URLs could be represented as events as well in the state machine, 
>>>> >> but could happen at anytime, whereas other events and related 
>>>> >> transition depend on the current state in a state machine. So it's like 
>>>> >> you have a top-level state machine for URLs, and each URL has its own 
>>>> >> state machine for all interactions in the page. Maybe page-state 
>>>> >> machine could be refined in multiple levels state machines too, not 
>>>> >> sure about that. It seems like Hierarchical State Machine may help 
>>>> >> here, but I haven't studied the subject yet at all.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> What do you think ?
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with 
>>>> > your first post.
>>>> > ---
>>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>> > Groups "ClojureScript" group.
>>>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>>> > an email to [email protected].
>>>> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>>>> > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with 
>>>> your first post.
>>>> ---
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>>>> "ClojureScript" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>>>> email to [email protected].
>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with 
>>> your first post.
>>> --- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the 
>>> Google Groups "ClojureScript" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit 
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/clojurescript/7STtgK5QiIc/unsubscribe.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>>> [email protected].
>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.
>> -- 
>> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
>> first post.
>> --- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "ClojureScript" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected].
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.
> -- 
> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
> first post.
> --- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google 
> Groups "ClojureScript" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/clojurescript/7STtgK5QiIc/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
> [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

Reply via email to