[e-lang] [RFP] cross-language object serialization (E <--->
rwithers12 at attbi.com
Tue Jan 21 07:56:12 UTC 2003
On Monday, January 20, 2003, at 03:44 PM, Tyler Close wrote:
> On Monday 20 January 2003 15:44, Robert Withers wrote:
>> In rereading what you originally wrote, what gave me
>> pause was your stance on the less dynamic view that the other side
>> would have to be independently upgraded to support the new types.
>> There is no reason we couldn't dynamically build a meta-representation
>> of the type, as well as start attaching facets to that type so it
>> operate in a service environment.
> Facets are behaviour. How are you going to attach behaviour to an
> unknown type without defining a universal runtime? Are you
> planning to implement a Kernel-E interpreter?
Tyler, a common misunderstanding is what it means that squeakers
develop inside their runtime. I don't know if you're a lisper or
Smalltalker or not. If a new class just showed up in front of me, I
could start adding methods to it. There are several implementations of
grouping subsets of behavior into Traits or facets. I believe they can
be attached to any Behavior instance.
We have a universal runtime over here in Squeak. :) Aside from
all the bit-identical platforms (21?), we have access to all the source
code of the vm, in fact, I changed the method lookup primitive to
support Refs. vm: (http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/1447). vm
maker (http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/2105). virtual machine
I wasn't going to implement a E interpreter (who will do this, I
wonder?). I mean adding new MirandaMethods, as I understand them now,
or override existing ones. Well, not MirandaMethods, because they
don't have to be understood by everyone. If you send me an object of
unknown type, I could attach some behavior to it's new Class instance,
and then you could eventual send those messages to that object, without
>> CDR back-of-the-envelope analysis:
>>> 1. it should be a binary representation for performance and
> Any stats?
no. I think your parser is very fast.
>>> 4. it should be easy to register mappings for new types
>> IDL. interfaces can be published. a new incoming types can be looked
>> up in an interface repository. this has nothing to do with encoding,
>> but rather implementation resolution of encoding.
> How do you create a collision-free namespace for new types?
use a RuntimeEnvironment to localize them to that process. I like
embedding the type resolver in the connection.
The only reason I push back is that there may be other forms of
communication we could do between 2 squeaks, like passing blocks and
debugging remote stacks. it would great if some of that could be built
between E and Squeak, but that will probably have to follow the typing
model of squeak. Dynamic typing is the only way that 2 different
environments will be able to migrate code between them.
More information about the Squeak-dev