Would Tunes be interested in this Object manager...?

[Francois-Rene Rideau]

On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 07:50:39PM +0200, Marcus Petersson wrote:
> Have Tunes produced some object system that I'm unaware of?
No, but we have reviewed many that you should be aware of,
if you are to produce anything interesting.
See CLOS, Smalltalk, SELF, Dylan, OCaml, Haskell, BETA,
and many many systems that have been proposed and prototyped
but have not been otherwise made widely available.
OOPSLA and ECOOP conferences and associated workshops
have a lot of papers in their proceedings about
the theory of object systems, how to analyze their types, etc.,
or their practice, how to implement them, etc.
I recommend you get familiar with this kind of literature.

> Of course, but who am I to battle the results of history?
People ask you to *understand* history, and the reason for those results,
not to "battle" them. Past is facts that can't be battled anymore.
Battles are for the future, and *you* are the one claiming to be
building a great object system. If you don't understand the past,
your future action will probably be a worthless reinvention of part
of what was already done better.

> Would you propose that I should rather choose some other langauge
> that compiles down to C, or directly to binary?
Languages don't compile. Compilers do.

> Which has the
> best support for many platforms, and produces fast code (comparable to C)?
C is not fast. It is very slow except in a few cases, and even in those
few exceptional cases, it is not that fast, and slower than assembly.

[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
[  TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System  | http://tunes.org  ]
Having good original ideas is no excuse for not knowing good established ideas.
Your supra-fast turbo engine won't be much good when attached to square wheels.