From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from list by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.71)
	id 1gkp4N-00086U-JT
	for mharc-gwl-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2019 06:45:47 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:45707)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1gkp4L-00086F-0K
	for gwl-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2019 06:45:45 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1gkp4K-0004Sc-7i
	for gwl-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2019 06:45:44 -0500
Received: from sender-of-o53.zoho.com ([135.84.80.218]:21739)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1gkp4J-0004PX-PZ
	for gwl-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2019 06:45:44 -0500
References: <87bm4df2ld.fsf@elephly.net>
	<CAJ3okZ1enxGxXxjAVdgNjzU8mwEs8aDquZfLKAaLaT1WLYXUTg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
Message-ID: <878szgg9bi.fsf@elephly.net>
In-reply-to: <CAJ3okZ1enxGxXxjAVdgNjzU8mwEs8aDquZfLKAaLaT1WLYXUTg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2019 12:45:33 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IG1lcmdpbmcg4oCccHJvY2Vzc2Vz4oCdIGFuZCDigJxyZXN0?=
 =?UTF-8?B?cmljdGlvbnPigJ0=?=
List-Id: <gwl-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/gwl-devel>,
	<mailto:gwl-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gwl-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:gwl-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gwl-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gwl-devel>,
	<mailto:gwl-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
Cc: gwl-devel@gnu.org


Hi simon,

> I am not clear yet about how to manage the inputs/outputs
> (fixed in the definition of the process or fixed in the workflow)
[=E2=80=A6]
> I am still failing to write a macro that inplements my "view":
>  - write the graph
>  - collect the inputs/outputs

This is interesting and it might be a solution to this conundrum.  If
the processes can declare their inputs without refering to other
processes then we have a solution: the graph can be built from the
inputs and outputs of the provided processes without having to specify
any dependencies manually.

We need a procedure that takes any number of processes as inputs and
matches inputs with outputs to generate an adjacency list of processes.
This shouldn=E2=80=99t be difficult.

> I pick the name `dataflow' for this not-yet-immplemented macro name.
>
> Well, instead of your graph name, I propose dataflow or stream or datastr=
eam.

I=E2=80=99d like this to be a short name if possible.  In fact, I=E2=80=99d=
 prefer if it
was completely invisible like this:

   (workflow
    (name "simple")
    (processes
      ((eat "fruit") -> greet)
      ((eat "veges") -> greet)
      (sleep         -> (eat "fruit") (eat "veges"))
      (bye           -> sleep)))

Or like this assuming that all of the processes declare inputs and
outputs *somehow*:

  (workflow
   (name "simple")
   (processes
     (eat "fruit") (eat "veges") greet sleep bye))

I=E2=80=99ll play around with this today.

--
Ricardo