29 Apr 2001 02:08:02 -0400

Related articles |
---|

working with very large Finite State Machines sjbradtke@home.com (Steve Bradtke) (2001-04-22) |

Re: working with very large Finite State Machines vannoord@let.rug.nl (2001-04-26) |

Re: working with very large Finite State Machines chase@world.std.com (David Chase) (2001-04-26) |

Re: working with very large Finite State Machines rboland@unb.ca (Ralph Boland) (2001-04-26) |

Re: working with very large Finite State Machines rbates@southwind.net (Rodney M. Bates) (2001-04-29) |

From: | "Rodney M. Bates" <rbates@southwind.net> |

Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |

Date: | 29 Apr 2001 02:08:02 -0400 |

Organization: | Compilers Central |

References: | 01-04-117 |

Keywords: | lex |

Posted-Date: | 29 Apr 2001 02:08:02 EDT |

I don't know if this applies to your problem, but in many FSMs with a

large state set, the state set can be cartesian factored into a tuple

of several components. Taken literally, the state set is the

cartesian product of the value sets of the components. The input set

might be factorable too.

Often, the transition function may then have patterns which allow it

to be expressed as a function of the components, much more

compactly. I don't know if such patterns and factorings exist in your

application. If not, then just defining the states and transitions is

a big problem too, because it has to be done by brute force

enumeration.

*> I am working on a project that involves the construction of*

*> very large Finite State Machines (up to approximately 10^7 states).*

*> project.*

--

Rodney M. Bates

Post a followup to this message

Return to the
comp.compilers page.

Search the
comp.compilers archives again.