Re: [Introspector-developers] Happy new year, plan for 2003

[Kyle L. <ky...@ar...>]

James Michael DuPont wrote:

 > The mop interface will be written in a high level language, based on
 > RDFS DAML.

 From what little I can see DAML+OIL is the only standard relating to 
class definitions (http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-index.html). 
But even this is quite restrictive (class algebras and attribute 
definitions only).

 > I hope to defined  with you a set of predicates that are available to
 > use in a RDF file that can be used as a resource in the future.
 > Documented and related to other models. The whole trick is to produce
 > files that we can build apon. That is one drawback of the current usage
 > of perl hashes for storage in the introspector, there is too little
 > structure and they are hard to interpret.
 >
 >  A set of predicates that are available. Right now that is the contents
 > of the ModifyClasses and the Meta* classes.

Am I right to assume you are concerned that your existing set of 
predicates may not be sufficient?  Copying CLOS would provide a sense of 
security that the necessary predicates are defined, despite not being in 
use at this time?

 > We have that meta-model that is used to describe language structures
 > dealt with. Then we have an instance of that that are extracted by the
 > gcc into the input/types_overview and input/fields_overview and the
 > CreateClasses.  These files define the gcc c,c++,and java model as an
 > instance of a meta model. From there we translate the model into
 > different languages, perl, java, sql, (treecc) etc. later also CLOS.

 >>Will this standard MOP will take the form of a document that humans
 >>can read?
 >
 > yes.

Then I would be happy to at least start something.  I would prefer a 
more UML-like notation over DAML/XML.  I am a more visual person than 
textual.

 >>What language is this all written in?  Perl?
 >
 > right now, yet. The whole challenge is to defined a Java and Lisp based
 > interface into this MetaData, and the instance data so that you can get
 > a standard stream of program data from the gcc. What you do with it and
 > how you process it is application specific.

Oh.  There are two problems Introspector may be solving, please indicate 
which one:

1)	If we want an MetaData interface to Java, Lisp, etc, then should we 
just build the prerequisite classes in each that will read the 
*.ntriples data and provide ability to tour the resulting objects (which 
describe the program structure).  This option is dreadfully simple to 
do, but hard to extend.
2)	We make a set of programs (in Perl) that write the MetaData interface 
for each langauge (let's call these programs the "MetaClassWriters"). 
The MetaClassWriters are easily extensible because, presumably, they 
read some common meta-class description.  Ihis version is harder to 
write because of the meta-programming involved.  You appear to be doing 
this now.

I am lost as to what the ultimate goal is.  Maybe I stop asking dumb 
questions if you told me about some example program that would use this.







-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kyle Lahnakoski                                       ky...@ar...
(416) 892-7784                                    Arcavia Software Ltd