Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5398465" data-attributes="member: 82106">Dausuul, my point was that the interrupt 'stack' is just the call stack of the functions that are resolving each power. So when you get to an interrupt you just jump into its 'resolveAction()' entry point. Now, you will need a context within each resolver that keeps track of any reactions etc that need to be added to the end of that action. You COULD use a single stack for that probably, but it seems better self-contained to just have a list of 'things that need to be called when this action is done resolving'.So A uses power X on B, C reacts to X with Y (Y added to X's 'stack'), B interrupts X with Z (control passes immediately to Z). Thus X would have control, Y would be added to X's list/stack of reactions to execute, and then Z would be given control. When Z returns X finishes resolving which will involve executing Y before it returns control to whatever called it.Maybe I didn't quite understand your design either. There could also be some other wrinkle I haven't thought of, but I think it covers the basic scenario OK.</blockquote>