[IGSTK-Developers] Re: public.kitware.com: Dashboards & State-Machines for Applications.

[Luis Ibanez]

Hi Patrick,

Thanks for fixing the build01 and build02 machine's configurations.


---


About your question regarding the Applications and the State Machine:

You are right !

The use of the State Machines at the component level is still not a
full safeguard. We must also use state machine for representing the
normal workflow of the surgical application.

The difficulty here is that we don't have a way of forcing the
application developer to use a state machine in order to guide
her/his app. Maybe we should introduce a mechanism for doing so...

For example, Qt has the QtApp class from which your applications
can derive. We could impose a similar restriction on IGSTK, by
adding a igstk::Application class, from which all the final applications
must derive. In this way we could introduce C++ mechanisms for forcing
the developers to have a State-Machine-Controlled workflow.

We should probably discuss this further in the tcon, or even create
a Wiki page about the pros and cons.


Luis



--------------------
Patrick Cheng wrote:
> Hi Luis,
> 
> The build01(linux) and build02(vs60) are back on track again. you might 
> already have seen it from the dashboard. I will add more continuous 
> build machine (vs71, cygwin) this week.
> 
> For the new application, I am just wondering, since all the IGSTK 
> componets are well protected by the state machine, is it neccessary and 
> possible to warp the state machine with the application? or the 
> statemachines in the components are good enough to ensure the safety of 
> the application?
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Pat
> 
> Luis Ibanez wrote:
> 
>>
>> Hi Patrick
>>
>> Could you please fix the configuration of the
>> Sandbox build in the machine "build01.isis":
>>
>> http://public.kitware.com/IGSTK/Sites/build01.isis/Sandbox-Linux-g++-static-debug/20050826-0430-Nightly/Configure.html 
>>
>>
>> It has an incorrect path for IGSTK_DIR.
>>
>>
>>   Thanks
>>
>>
>>     Luis
>>
>>
>>
>