Wednesday, May 02, 2007

Proposal: Resting the Machine

Self-kill. —Axeling

Adminned at 02 May 2007 21:25:54 UTC

in rule 2.3.2 “Variables” change the following:

*Name: The name by which the Variable is refered (and any abbreviations by which it may be refered).
*Creator: The name of the Worker(s) considered responsible for adding the Variable to the Machine.
*Possible States: A description of the possible states the variable may be in.  If appropriate, a description of the order in which the variable advances may be included.
*State: The current State of the Variable (which must always be one of the possible states described in the previous bullet-point).

to:

*Name: The name by which the Variable is refered (and any abbreviations by which it may be refered).
*Creator: The name of the Worker(s) considered responsible for adding the Variable to the Machine.
*Possible States: A description of the possible states the variable may be in.  If appropriate, a description of the order in which the variable advances may be included.
*State: The current State of the Variable (which must always be one of the possible states described in the previous bullet-point).
*Default State: The Base State which, when the Machine is Standing By, the Current State of the Variable is returned to (Note that setting Variables to their Default State does not Cause the Machine to become Runnig).

Because Ideally the machine will be reset each time, not started up again and again.

Comments

Hix:

05-02-2007 16:24:15 UTC

against If we want some variables to be allowed to be reset, we’ll make a part that allows such a reset to occur.  I’m against making it so that every variable _always_ resets every time.

Also feasable would be a Rule containing a list of Variables, and saying that any Variable on the list can be reset without causing the machine to become Running (possibly subject to restrictions such as only once per day per Worker).  Better yet, instead of a list, there can be a [resettable] descriptor which can optionally be added to a variable.

spikebrennan:

05-02-2007 16:40:00 UTC

against Agree with all of Hix’s points.  My thinking on _my_ proposal was that Parts are either Activated or Deactivated, and they all become Deactivated once the Machine goes into Standby, but all Variables keep their states unless expressly changed.

Amnistar:

05-02-2007 16:44:00 UTC

But the idea of a Goldberg Machine is that it’s a complex set of parths that you activate once, and it does a simple task.  You don’t start the device then stop it halfway through, add some more pieces, then continue, it’s a 1 shot device.

spikebrennan:

05-02-2007 16:46:11 UTC

That ignores the “Running” / “Standby” distinction and the circumstances that cause the Machine to be “Running”.

Hix:

05-02-2007 17:29:59 UTC

A Goldberg Machine may be _intended_ to only be operated in order to perform the given task, but that doesn’t mean that the if/then or cause/effect relationships that are built into it aren’t active during construction.  If someone accidentally pushes over the first domino while reaching to adjust the setting on the flux capacitor….

Amnistar:

05-02-2007 17:42:50 UTC

I suppose you’re correct, then steps have to be taken to reset everything :p

Amnistar:

05-02-2007 19:33:48 UTC

against S.K. will reprose slightly idfferent