From: Brian Ingerson <ingy@tt...> - 2002-10-23 00:47:12
----- Forwarded message from James Michael DuPont <mdupont777@...> -----
From: James Michael DuPont <mdupont777@...>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 16:21:17 -0700 (PDT)
To: Peter Minten <peter.minten@...>
Cc: DotGNU Developers Mailing List <developers@...>, ingy@...
Subject: Re: RFC 6: Meta Object Description subcommittee (was RFC 3: Subcommittees)
The meta-object workgroup will be made of members from various free
software projects interested in iteroperability and supporting free
exchange of object descriptions.
The commitee will publish a mapping between the various object models,
in a form that is machine readable (XML/RDF/Yaml/Text)
and usable to feed into a software to help speed up the translations.
Here are some suggestions :
(I have done on paper the ground work on these models :)
Ecma Reflection C# Class model
DotGNU Tree Nodes
GCC Tree Nodes
The ASP.Net CodeDom Model
And propose to add the following :
Java Reflection and Bean introspection model
Perl XS objects (sv,av,mv etc)
The OpenC++ Class model
The OMG XMI and mof (meta object model)
The Ruby introspection API
The DAML/OIL Ontology language
The mapping will support things like
Types, Structs, Fields, functions and all that.
Today I have experimented with the C interface to treecc,
Creating swig and xs routine to hook into the treecc generated
structures. For some reason I see that we are all doing the same thing
over and over again. The treecc generated sets and gets, swig and
inline as well.
Anyway, swig and inline are able to generate all types of wrapping code
for c structures. I am working on the swig interface, and will be
interested in extending swig/inline to cover dotgnu/pnet. The amount of
swig/inline interfaces available will
I have talked to Ingy from the inline, (and have cced him on this mail)
he is working on the new inline model that will support multiple
language glue bindings, this could and should include the pnet/pinvoke
as well. He also supports the idea of a mapping system and offered some
I would like to invite Ingy and others from the community into the
dotgnu meta project for involving them in the decision making on the
priority and the review of the various mappings.
--- Peter Minten <peter.minten@...> wrote:
> James Michael DuPont wrote:
> > RFC Number : Mdupont +1
> In my temporal function as chief librarian (the librarian
> subcommittee needs to
> be established) I assign this RFC the number 6.
> > Name: Meta Object Description subcommittee
> > Area: DotGNU Subcommittee Group
> No such WG. This proposal falls under Foundation code WG? (important
> grouping RFC's)
> > End of RFC.
> > <Comment>
> > it would be interesting to see what you think about this idea,
> > can you please just send a quick yes/no type answer back?
> > thanks,
> > mike
> > </Comment>
> Sounds cool.
Thanks for your support, I hope to make a clearer statement of focus in
a week or two after some more research and discussion.
James Michael DuPont
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
----- End forwarded message -----