General Query : Subflows vs. Link Call - Roadmap

Hi ,

I have a general query - How does NR team see the roadmap / future of subflows vs. Link Call.

The main merit of Subflows which i see is -

  1. Parameterization - parameters allow on subflow definition - even if static.
  2. Modularization (with Link Call - this is fairly achieved).
  3. Delivery as Out of Box node (SubFlow as a node).
  4. Hopefully - in future - black box delivery - where creation of subflow to node is seamless. And end-user had zero visibility of sublfow's internal implementation.

The biggest advantage of Link Call

  1. Modularization
  2. Easy Import/Export. (Subflows import/export brings new instance of original flows itself).

Maybe there are more benefits of each - which i am missing.
I do use both of these and see merits.

Does the NR team - foresee the 2 functionalities meeting in future ?

  1. Singleton pattern (one instance)
  2. Polymorphism (via dynamic message routing)
1 Like

The link call is an enhancement to the link node - and as you have noted has different characteristics from the subflow node concept - so I'm not aware of any plans to merge them.

Further to Steve's comment, the big difference is that with Link Call there is only one instance of the called flow. With Subflows each time you place the subflow on a flow that creates a new instance of the subflow. So, for example, each instance has it's own flow context and if you save context in a function then that is unique to that instance of the subflow.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.