Alan, AFAIK, I'm not inventing anything new. I am collecting some concepts and ideas that I happen to have come across (Mainly Smalltalk +Squeak + UML +some of my own) and try to cast them in a consistent architecture. Currently, I am creating and implementing a first architecture and kernel. In theory, practice should be straight forward, but I find that practice is surprisingly hard. The work isn't finished before I can share it with other people and they ask me how I could spend such a long time to get such such obvious results.
Mainstream is still to use OS and programming technology from the sixties (Unix and 3GLs). I am surprised that so many have been satisfied with so little for so long, and that the many innovations that must be out there aren't better known.
Cheers --Trygve
At 27.11.2004 22:36, Alan Grimes wrote:
I am not happy because I find I spend an inordinate amount of time reading code without really understanding it. I can read almost every statement, but cannot envision what the objects are and do at run time. (And this applies to code I wrote a year ago.) I need to change the very notion of a program to get through the barrier to the run time objects. This means introducing higher level, object oriented notions to give me leverage and to hide some of the most obfuscating facilities.
=) I think you are on the brink of re-inventing something I've developed, at least conceptually.