|
|
@@ -32,4 +32,33 @@ Todo, when I find the time:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Think: Introduce read-dependencies
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+- A NodeDeletion also unsets all outgoing edges of a node. Incoming edges must be unset by EdgeUpdates, and the NodeDeletion must depend on these EdgeUpdates. Maybe it will make the implementation (of conflict checking) simpler if a NodeDeletion would *not* automatically unset outgoing edges, and instead also would have to depend on EdgeUpdates that un-set the nodes?
|
|
|
+ Pro: Simpler conflict-checking code
|
|
|
+ Pro: Related to the previous, will also make the addition of read-dependencies easier to implement.
|
|
|
+ Pro: Easier to explain to people
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+- Add meta-models and conformance checking
|
|
|
+- Add action language to FSA
|
|
|
+- Add concrete syntax
|
|
|
+- Add neutral action language for graph operations
|
|
|
+ see ModelVerse specification.
|
|
|
+ implement VF2, ... on top of this action language.
|
|
|
+ -. Then bootstrap.
|
|
|
+ => look at Scheme
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Cip:
|
|
|
+ - maybe when live modeling alone, don't need to know dependencies, conflicts, between deltas
|
|
|
+ - maybe only need two kinds of dependencies: Reads and Writes.
|
|
|
+ - consistency checking on append-only set:
|
|
|
+ look into database theory, eventual consistency to enable concurrent read/write access
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ - nicer visualization for graphs:
|
|
|
+ render them as objects/tables (can be done with graphviz)
|
|
|
+ - interaction nets:
|
|
|
+ the optimal implementatoin of functional languages
|
|
|
+ (nice rabbit hole)
|
|
|
+ garbage collection for free
|
