HLL/INT: What is an object, anyway?

Rainer Blome rainer@physik3.gwdg.de
Wed, 14 Jun 1995 16:06:01 +0200

I'd like to give more comments (indeed, have two pages _almost_ finished,
but not quite), but don't have time.  I prefer to write really cooked
stuff, the noise level is high enough anyway.  Just this much (raw):

  - I really loved reading about MIT's `exo'kernel.  That's exactly what
    I want: `somewhat' standardized device drivers for the time and space
    ressources.  (Oops, I just mistyped `satandardized'.  Does this tell
    us anything about the word `standardized'? ;-) That's the equivalent
    of Emacs in the field of OSs.

  - What is Tunes?  A protocol?  A set of standard (alternative) libraries?
    What is the difference b/w an exokernel and Tunes?

  - Farč's object definition:
    >  So my definition for an object would be:
    >  "anything whose semantics can be finitely coded into a Turing Machine".
    Oh, sh**.  Do we really need that?  I hope we don't.

  - I'll do a 'diff Pascal Lisp'.
    I'll do a 'diff C++ Self'.
    I'll do a 'diff Self Lisp'.

    By this I'm trying to set up a crude scheme to describe and classify
    languages.  Hmm - this MUST have been done before, just where is it?

    Lisp stands for `functional/interpreted' as well as Scheme.
    Pascal stands for `imperative/compiled' as well as C/Algol/Fortran/Modula.
    C++ stands for `class-based/typed'.
    Self stands for `prototypes/untyped'.

    Yes, I know that those pairs are not fixed.  Java for example is
    class-based, typed, and imperative but (somewhat) interpreted.
    Java/HotJava is a good thing - only not good enough.  Maybe the java
    bytecode is OK as a LLL?
    Glossary entries for the languages with links to their description
    in the Review project will be the right thing - gimme one week.

    Could anybody write a 'diff Lisp SML' ?
    Could anybody write a 'diff Lisp Haskell' ?
    Could anybody write a 'diff Self BETA' ?

Ciao, Rainer