[OT: more nuggets]

[Ben]

---

@hockeystar31 wrote:

---

Ben wrote:

The action Engine approach will easily scale. 

---

I'm reading your Nugget on AE's now, thanks!  I'm totally unfamiliar with them, so I'm having trouble seeing how it applies here but I'll read on through before asking anything and wasting everyone's time.

---

One of my greatest regrest after writting that Nugget was that I never really expanded on the basic idea to illustrate the flexibility of the basic concept. The AE I was envisioning for your use would keep an array of booleans in the SR. One element for each availabe input to your "Smart Or" gate. The various actions it provides would act on the array of booleans by either set/clear for the action allowing the input of the Or gate to be set, or the "Evaluate" action would act based on what is in the arra stroed in the AE.

I'd even go another step further and create wrappers for each of the Actions that implied what they did ie Input would show Or Gat icon with outputs greyed out, eval would show inputs as greyed out but output active but that is just icing on the cake.

Ben

[hockeystar31]

---

Ben wrote:

One of my greatest regrest after writting that Nugget was that I never really expanded on the basic idea to illustrate the flexibility of the basic concept. The AE I was envisioning for your use would keep an array of booleans in the SR. One element for each availabe input to your "Smart Or" gate. The various actions it provides would act on the array of booleans by either set/clear for the action allowing the input of the Or gate to be set, or the "Evaluate" action would act based on what is in the arra stroed in the AE.

I'd even go another step further and create wrappers for each of the Actions that implied what they did ie Input would show Or Gat icon with outputs greyed out, eval would show inputs as greyed out but output active but that is just icing on the cake.

Ben

---

Maybe I should go ahead an explain my actual problem rather than what I think I need to do to solve it.  Basically I have two programs.  One can run up to 20 tests concurrently, while the other can run 20 tests sequentially.  I was tasked with combining the programs into one, giving the user the option of how they want the tests to run.  If "concurrent" is selected, I want all the tests to run at the same time.  If "sequential" is selected, I want the tests to run after the previous test is completed.

I initially tried wiring the Error Out from one test to the next case structure, but the concurrent case waited for Error Out value before executing, even though it didn't utilize the value in any way.

I'll play around with it and see what happens 🙂  Thanks!

[John_Deans]

On some occasions I would have found a form of combine error, that outputted the first error received, very useful. Typically  when I want to stop a multi process system on the first error, currently on a large system I use the user event system to send a system error message to the control process or more simply use "value (signaling)" property node to "press" the stop /exit button which also has some issues

[JÞB]

---

@hockeystar31 wrote:

---

Ben wrote:

One of my greatest regrest after writting that Nugget was that I never really expanded on the basic idea to illustrate the flexibility of the basic concept. The AE I was envisioning for your use would keep an array of booleans in the SR. One element for each availabe input to your "Smart Or" gate. The various actions it provides would act on the array of booleans by either set/clear for the action allowing the input of the Or gate to be set, or the "Evaluate" action would act based on what is in the arra stroed in the AE.

I'd even go another step further and create wrappers for each of the Actions that implied what they did ie Input would show Or Gat icon with outputs greyed out, eval would show inputs as greyed out but output active but that is just icing on the cake.

Ben

---

Maybe I should go ahead an explain my actual problem rather than what I think I need to do to solve it.  Basically I have two programs.  One can run up to 20 tests concurrently, while the other can run 20 tests sequentially.  I was tasked with combining the programs into one, giving the user the option of how they want the tests to run.  If "concurrent" is selected, I want all the tests to run at the same time.  If "sequential" is selected, I want the tests to run after the previous test is completed.

---

While you are playing around [HINT: read this first]

First: I'm envisioning that each "test" is simillar but may act on different "widgets"

 You've got a sticky situation here with needing code that changes its data flow.  Can this be done? NO! data dependancy must be known at compile time.  Can We "Fake it"? Yes:  By using an array of NAMED Notifiers and obtain the notifier reference to either "Concurant Notifier" or "Sequential Notifier-x-of-n" 

your combo application then either broadcasts a "Start test" notification to the concurannt notifier or cycles through the arrary starting each test and waiting for it to complete.  You'll probably want to use another notifier to listen for a "Test-x-Complete" message.

@Ben-  You could ease your concience anytime with another nugget

[Ben]

---

@JÞB wrote:

... 

@Ben-  You could ease your concience anytime with another nugget

---

I am waiting for the high-sign from management that the web-site is ready and I should comence with the Nuggetting.

Ben

[JÞB]

Glad to hear it Ben.  Those large regrets in life can weigh down on us unless atonement can be made.