[ENH][Modules] Another version
Andrew P. Black
black at cse.ogi.edu
Fri Sep 28 15:27:20 UTC 2001
I was reading about the concept of "Delta Modules" on the
Swiki (at http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/2063).
The idea of separating the loading of a DeltaModule into an
image from the activation of the features in that DelatModule is
something that I had not thought about before. I can see this as
having two benefits.
(1) A DeltaModule could be loaded, so that I can browse it
and see what it does, using all of the usual tools, without
having to activate it. (So this would subsume the
functionality of the Package Browser.)
(2) Activation and de-activation might be very much faster than
loading and unloading.
Are these the only advantages, or are there others?
If these advantages make the separation of loading from activation
and unloading from deactivation worthwhile, then shouldn't we make
the same separation for Modules themselves, not just for DeltaModules.
Finally, what is the motivation for introducing DeltaModules in the
first place? I can see it as a storage optimization (like using
diffs in RCS or SCCS rather than storing multiple copies of the same
stuff), but that does not mean that it needs to be visible to the
Squeak image side of things. If it is meant as a communication
protocol optimization, then it would need to be visible to Squeak,
since the composing of the base and the delta would have to happen in
the image. Is that the reason?
More information about the Squeak-dev