[PEAK] Re: trellis.Set.discard

Phillip J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Sun Oct 19 19:37:33 EDT 2008

At 03:38 PM 10/17/2008 +0300, Sergey Schetinin wrote:
>Phillip, any updates on this? I'm considering ways to proceed, so
>knowing if you have made any decision on cell initialization /
>.futures would help a lot. Is there any help with implementation or
>prototyping I can provide?

Hi Sergey; I've been out of town a few days, and won't likely have 
time for in-depth analysis this week either.  But I can tell you that 
restricting futures to single-rule access is a no-go; the whole point 
of futures was to allow multiple rules to touch the same data 
structure, allowing non-deterministic merge at the inter-rule level.

In other words, data structures do allow for "order" to be between 
rules, but it is a serializable history.

The ability to have a side-transaction is a good idea, 
though.  (Really a "back transaction", since it is sort of happening 
in the past.)  I haven't thought a lot about the isolation parameters, though.

Prototyping certainly would be helpful.

More information about the PEAK mailing list