[kepler-dev] Can "stop" interrupt "initialize()"

[Shawn Bowers]

No problem ... I thought you were referring to structural types -- int,
string, array of double, etc.  I agree with Bertram that structural type
checking would be very useful to have has a button akin to a staging
button, a run button, a stop button, and so on.  The semantic type stuff
is not essential to running a workflow --

-shawn



On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Kevin Ruland wrote:

>
> Shawn,
>
> I was not clear -- I was referring to the semantic type checking and the
> 'manual override' would only be for those users who have some deeper
> understanding of the data and don't want to go through the effort of
> annotating them correctly.  In retrospect, I should not have spoken
> because I don't know what the desired functionality of this portion of
> the system is.
>
> Kevin
>
> Shawn Bowers wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Kevin Ruland wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Bertram,
> >>
> >> Things like static type checking may be optional (to the workflow) in
> >> the sense that one could still execute a workflow without having done
> >> the static type checking step or perhaps the workflow could be executed
> >> if static type checking fails (user override?).
> >>
> >
> > Is this really true?  I don't think so in Ptolemy -- i.e., ptolemy throws
> > exceptions if unexpected types are found.  In general, I'm not sure that
> > for standard ptolemy/kepler type workflows, it even makes sense to run
> > them if they are not type safe.
> >
> >
>