Bax clarifies:
> One is able to describe _any_ digital hardwaredevice, including
> temparature sensors and mainframe computers. You are able to use these
> bricks in any other construction and combination. HDL has inputs, outputs,
> events, vectors of bits, vectors of vectors etc. pp.
True....but can it describe any arbitrary software component? That is where the difference
lies....HDL is Hardware Description Language. We are writing a container for software
components...not hardware. There is some commonality, but I think it's a stretch at best.
There may be some concepts we can borrow from HDL, but I doubt the syntax will be useful
as it stands.
> It is _not_ a modeling language, like UML, it is a reality language.
> Wiring-, Testing-, Simulation- Compilertools are parts of the language.
Is it XML based? Just curious...
> IMHO, if i read the docs of emblets - you are definig a second approach to
> HDL. The own OutPost HDL. I do not know ... looks like this second
> invention of the wheel for me.
Nope....we are defining an EDL. Embedlet Description Language, which is a subclass of
SDL (software description language). <grins>
Different beastie altogether, since embedlets will encompass business logic at some higher
level than hardware wiring does.
...Andrzej
Chaeron Corporation
http://www.chaeron.com
|
