Multiple state_machines... about transitions

[troessner]

Well, in theory it should be possible, however I found out that this doesn't work right now unfortunately.
If I find the time, I'll fix that - of course pull requests are welcome..:-)
To be honest this isn't very high on my priority list, because whenever I had the need for two state machines, I basically wanted two different models. However I don't deny that there might be use cases where multiple state machines make sense, I just haven't encountered one.
As far as I can see even naming a state machine with

state_machine :foo do

breaks the functionality. But then again, naming a state machine only makes sense if we have more than one (otherwise it's just default), so this is all more or less the same issue.

I am thinking of something like this (This won't work right now):

state_machine do # name will be `default`
  ...
end

state_machine :foo
  ...
end

where you can switch like that

my_model.switch_state_machine :foo

If you need that badly, you'll have to come up with a pull request I'm afraid..:-)

[troessner]

@dlepage Oh, and what's your use case for having multiple state machines for one model?

[dlepage]

Sure ! :) First of all, most of the time it's better to split a model into simple models... but sometime, it's overkill.

We can imagine a model that you have two(or more) points of view... eg. :

• Human... mental_state, physical_state...
• Order : shipping(processing) state, invoice state (NOTE: I know, an Invoice model can do the trick but adding a model just to manage a state seems overkill (and more left joins is not really better...)).

On 2012-05-18, at 07:16, Timo Rößner wrote:

@dlepage Oh, and what's your use case for having multiple state machines for one model?

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#50 (comment)

[troessner]

I see your reasoning. However, I am not convinced - "Human being" would be a "human" object composed of "body" and "spirit" for me...:-)
I am closing this issue.

[dlepage]

Please add "this gem is limited to one state machine for each model.

Envoyé de mon iPhone

Le 2012-05-21 à 18:41, "Timo Rößner"
[email protected]
a écrit :

I see your reasoning. However, I am not convinced - "Human being" would be a "human" object composed of "body" and "spirit" for me...:-)
I am closing this issue.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#50 (comment)