[Modules] Components or Modules??
Jecel Assumpcao Jr
jecel at merlintec.com
Tue Aug 21 02:20:12 UTC 2001
I have to agree that a layered approach that can be developed step by
step from the present system is the best choice for Squeak. I have gone
in the opposite direction for my own project since integrating the
different aspects and starting from a clean slate can make a simple and
synergetic solution possible. See how my design is coming along at
http://www.merlintec.com:8080/software/8
Feel free to steal any ideas there, though I am not sure it would work
in a system as complex as Squeak.
One problem in the components and modules debate is that there are two
separate system views that are not being explicitly stated. Most
programming languages are of the "blue print" kind - you can read one
long text and everything about the system that will exist at runtime is
in there. Squeak is a "living system" and the sources are no more a
complete description of it than the humane genome is all there is to a
person. You need DNA *and* a cell to get a new cell.
Both systems have their advantages and their problems. The ANSI
declarative Smalltalk effort is an attempt to get blue print advantages
in Smalltalk, for example. My impression is that many modularization
proposals are coming from the same direction.
On the other hand, NewtonOS's soups seemed to me like an attempt to
have a modular living system.
Can we have both? If not, what do each of us want?
-- Jecel
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|