[Vm-dev] Re: [Pharo-dev] [squeak-dev] Re: System and user processe

[Norbert Hartl]

Am 21.06.2016 um 17:37 schrieb Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com>:

>>> Hmm... I would implement such an API rather via composition than
>>> inheritance. Such a task does not necessarily have to run in the same image
>>> but could also be accomplished on another machine. OSProcess has RemoteTask
>>> for this. Inheritance would make things complicated once one would decide to
>>> not carry out the computation as a Squeak process.
> 
> It is implemented via composition, not inheritance.
> 
> Maybe it is name, ClientProcess, that made you assume it is a subclass
> of Process..?  It is not.  :)
> 
>>> I do like Tony's idea of process groups. We could think this one step
>>> further an add multiple tags (symbols?) to processes to support
>>> fine-granular or cross-cutting classifications.
>>> Tools like the process
>>> browser could show these tags, group by them, etc. There could be tags to
>>> identify processes that would stop working once you close the Squeak image
>>> (e.g. "not resumable")... Hmmm... Application developers could use tags to
>>> provide hints for other developers and users.
> 
> Processes already have names, which could facilitate a hierarchical
> naming if someone wanted, and list filtering in the Process browser
> would make "grouping" or "finding" a Process pretty much free..
> 
> If all you want to do is tag and group processes, I would consider
> putting them into named groups/containers rather than add more
> process-level attributes..
> 
That is exactly what I was thinking

Norbert