Re: [Objex-developers] Objex planning

[Andrew L. <er...@li...>]

Hello Mikhail.

Some explanation to my previous answer.

Mikhail Zabaluev wrote:

> Hello Andrew,
>
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2001 at 03:21:54PM +0200, Andrew Lipnitsky wrote:
> >
> > > Do you guys have any more extended master plan?
> > >
> > Yes, This plan is in my mind ;-)
>
> Well, I hope your mind is generous enough to put your vision in a document
> eventually :)
>
> > >  It would be very
> > > elucidative, e.g. to learn what that object system in CVS is for,
> > >
> > Did you mean objex-M1 branch? If so, these are rough drafts of system
> > objects
> > of future operating system Objex. Recently I have put there sources
> > (incomplete)
> > of  main Objex objects: "Object", "Class", "Metaclass", "Operation" and
> > so on.
> > Please, take a look.
>
> These look like base classes for something. I have no further idea, as
> i've yet to see any implementation. The object system looks baroque
> compared to the C-based class/interface systems
>
You had seen just kernel implementation code in objex-M1 CVS branch.
C language is *just* kernel implementation language. It is not
application
implementation language for Objex. C language will not be present at
all.
There will be a primary object implementation language named by
"eternity"
(developing this language is a part of the project).

>  I'm used to,
> namely the CORBA C binding and GTK GObject).
>
> > >  and
> > > how do you see processes interacting with the system.
> > >
> > There is no term of  "process" in Objex. The main notion is Object. All
> > things are
> > objects. User's object will interact with system one by method
> > invocation.
>
> OK, but in terms of CPU execution there are protected contexts. Any
> security and authentication is manageable only to these contexts'
> granularity, because objects in the same address space can forge
> one another. Restricting each CPU context to represent exactly one object
> is totally impractical due to the cost of context creation and switching,
> so you have to maintain a notion of "processes", "domains", or whatever.
>
> > Every class is inherited from Object class. Object class has methods
> > which
> > return references to few system objects (for bootstrapping). So every
> > object has such methods.
>
> Has this any advantages over discoverability of interfaces a-la COM?
>
> --
> Stay tuned,
>   MhZ                                     JID: mo...@ja...
>
>
_____________________________________________________________

     Dr. Andrew Lipnitsky
     e-mail: er...@li...
     Web: http://www.lipnitsky.org
     See also: http://www.objex.org