Brian T Rice
Tue Apr 29 18:06:01 2003
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, Mario Blazevic wrote:
> You can find the formal definition of the language at page 97 of the
> MPOOL 2001 workshop proceedings
> (http://www.fz-juelich.de/nic-series/Volume7/Volume7.html). As I said,
> the definition is from a calculus angle, so you may have some problems
> relating it to the OO terminology. But if you point me to a formal
> definition of Slate, I can try to explain the idea in the formal method
> of your choice.
Slate's not designed to be subjected to "formal methods" as a central
point. Anyway, I read over GENS again (I recall reading on it some time
ago) and it reminds me of Symmetric Lisp and both were part of my initial
basis for Slate, which is history now.
Don't worry about explaining it. You basically speak in a different
language from what most OOP users choose, and are mixing metaphors too
easily without notifying the listener. (You may have noticed that I am
also used to both terminologies, but it's absolutely useless to try to mix
the two without mastering both first.)
At any rate, yes, environments lost out in my mind to configurations,
although it took a while to formulate the latter concept.
Brian T. Rice
LOGOS Research and Development