synapse-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Saminda Abeyruwan" <>
Subject Re: proposed change to <send/>
Date Fri, 05 May 2006 10:35:14 GMT
On 5/4/06, Sanjiva Weerawarana <> wrote:
> We currently have the semantic that <send/> implicitly is an end of
> execution of the current ruleset. I'd like to propose we change that:
> First of all, the name is not intuitive of that behavior. OK so we can
> fix the name, but I'd like to separate the two actions: that of sending
> a message and that of finishing execution.
> What I suggest is we change <send/> to be just that: send the message
> per the semantics of send. When send is done, if there are any other
> rules around they keep executing.

currently <send/> new SynapseMessage and set the response msg and inject to
the env for further processing. if to do prior we would have to change it.
Now once <send/> done we have the new response msg. Are we continuing the
rest of the ruleset with the new msg ?.

Now, I don't want to force everyone to write <send/> either (which is
> what we have now and that's cool). So how about saying that if the
> ruleset completes without the message being sent, then there's an
> implied <send/> at the end .. that means things work exactly as the way
> it does now for when <send/> is NOT there, but if its there then one can
> continue and send it to another place for example.
> Note that this also has the nice feature that you can use it to send the
> message, then change some stuff and send it elsewhere or send an event
> somewhere or whatever.

So we may expect more than one <send/> per ruleset per msg. ? if so that's
pretty cool.

How does Synapse  know  the  the end o f the ruleset per given msg?

> Sanjiva.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message