Re:So You Think You Can Program an Elevator
by seivan on Wednesday January 13, 2016 @03:58AM
(#10893110)
I was actually promoting a stack as that would make things easier, but it's still tacked on a solution that isn't as good.
A well designed FSM doesn't necessarily mean an easily read FSM.
I always try to draw states and transitions on paper, and I end up making a mess. That could be a flaw on my side. But I won't be making the same mess with BT.
I don't see how a FSM could avoid having transitions back and forth.
* Elevator is on level 3
* A person in the elevator wants to go to level 4
* A person waiting for down on level 5
* A person in the elevator wants to go to level 2
* A person waiting for down on level 2
FSM would need to track current floor and direction.
Would need guards/predicates on transitions for inputs
Could just be me, but I wouldn't be able to draw a pretty picture with those.
A well designed FSM doesn't necessarily mean an easily read FSM.
I always try to draw states and transitions on paper, and I end up making a mess. That could be a flaw on my side. But I won't be making the same mess with BT.
I don't see how a FSM could avoid having transitions back and forth.
FSM would need to track current floor and direction. Would need guards/predicates on transitions for inputs Could just be me, but I wouldn't be able to draw a pretty picture with those.