[jira] [Resolved] (SCXML-206) Specification mismatch: event-less transitions are triggered by named events

["Ate Douma (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCXML-206?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Ate Douma resolved SCXML-206.
-----------------------------
       Resolution: Fixed
    Fix Version/s: 2.0

I've applied the above mentioned fixes.
Please test and report if this now works for your scenario(s).
Note however that full compliance with the specification is not yet intended: there are definitely other limitations and mismatches in the current event IO processing (both internal and external) which will be dealt with later (Milestone 3 or maybe earlier).

> Specification mismatch: event-less transitions are triggered by named events
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SCXML-206
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCXML-206
>             Project: Commons SCXML
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 2.0
>            Reporter: Johannes Wienke
>            Assignee: Ate Douma
>             Fix For: 2.0
>
>
> The SCXML 2 specification indicates the following in section 3.13
> {quote}
> A transition is enabled by NULL in atomic state S if a) T lacks an 'event' attribute b) T's source state is S or an ancestor of S c) T lacks an 'cond' attribute or its 'cond' attribute evaluates to "true". (Note that such a transition can never be enabled by any named event.)
> {quote}
> The last aspect that event-less conditions can never be triggered by a named event is currently violated by the trunk implementation.
> Imagine the following example document:
> {code:xml}
> <scxml xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/07/scxml" xmlns:rsb="http://opensource.cit-ec.de/rsb"
> 	version="1.0" initial="Start" name="CustomActionSequential">
> 	<state id="Start">
> 		<onentry>
> 			<log expr="'Starting onentry of state Start'"></log>
> 			<send event="'test'" delay="'100ms'"></send>
> 			<rsb:generic rsb:class="rsb.scxml.LongRunningAction"
> 				name="first"></rsb:generic>
> 			<log expr="'Finished onentry of state Start'"></log>
> 		</onentry>
> 		<onexit>
> 			<log expr="'onexit of state Start'"></log>
> 		</onexit>
> 		<transition target="End">
> 		</transition>
> 	</state>
> 	<final id="End">
> 		<onentry>
> 			<log expr="'onentry of state End'"></log>
> 		</onentry>
> 	</final>
> </scxml>
> {code}
> The rsb:generic action is simply a custom action that wastes some processing time by sleeping 1 second.
> The logging output that you get when executing this is the following:
> {noformat}
> Aug 29, 2014 11:04:26 AM org.apache.commons.scxml2.model.Log execute
> INFO: null: Starting onentry of state Start
> Aug 29, 2014 11:04:26 AM org.apache.commons.scxml2.model.Log execute
> INFO: null: onexit of state Start
> Aug 29, 2014 11:04:26 AM org.apache.commons.scxml2.model.Log execute
> INFO: null: onentry of state End
> Aug 29, 2014 11:04:27 AM org.apache.commons.scxml2.model.Log execute
> INFO: null: Finished onentry of state Start
> {noformat}
> As you can see, the named event raised by the send action has triggered the transition since the outputs are not in the expected sequential order. This should not happen according to the specification.
> On the other hand, if you do not send an event at all, the state machine gets stuck. This confirms that the transition was actually really triggered by the sent event. Moreover, it also sounds like a specification mismatch to me. The respective quote from the specification is:
> {quote}
> After checking the state configuration, the Processor must select the optimal transition set enabled by NULL in the current configuration. If the set is not empty, it must execute it as a microstep.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)