Thread: [Objex-developers] Objex planning
Status: Pre-Alpha
Brought to you by:
ert
Menu
▾
▴
objex-developers
|
From: Mikhail Z. <mh...@al...> - 2001-11-12 08:44:08
|
Hello objex-developers, I was looking for a truly novel OS project which would have all features I expect of "the next great OS". So I came upon Objex :) The brief descriptions on the site are nice, but, well, too brief. Do you guys have any more extended master plan? It would be very elucidative, e.g. to learn what that object system in CVS is for, and how do you see processes interacting with the system. Brace yourself, my question-thrower is uncovered and ready to fire :) One of the interesting issues is the academic background. You plegde to encompass recent developments in computer science. Does any of you try to pursue any research goals on this project, to implement any theoretical model in it? I ended my academic activity more than 3 years ago (Moscow Univ., the CS department whose name shall not be translated here :)), and I still feel warm to these things. But I think that a successful system should have a practical angle first of all (*ahem* Hurd *ahem*). -- Stay tuned, MhZ JID: mo...@ja... |
|
From: Andrew L. <er...@li...> - 2001-11-13 14:25:59
|
Hi,
Mikhail Zabaluev wrote:
> Hello objex-developers,
>
> I was looking for a truly novel OS project which would have all
> features I expect of "the next great OS". So I came upon Objex :)
> The brief descriptions on the site are nice,
>
Thank you ;-)
> but, well, too brief.
>
Unfortunately, It is true. This is because I am developing Objex during
my spare time.
> Do you guys have any more extended master plan?
>
Yes, This plan is in my mind ;-)
> 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.
> 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.
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.
> Brace yourself,
> my question-thrower is uncovered and ready to fire :)
>
> One of the interesting issues is the academic background. You plegde
> to encompass recent developments in computer science. Does any of you
> try to pursue any research goals on this project, to implement any
> theoretical model in it?
>
The short answer is yes.
> I ended my academic activity more than 3
> years ago (Moscow Univ., the CS department whose name shall not be
> translated here :)), and I still feel warm to these things.
>
Of course, Objex is open for new ideas. So you are welcome to join to
Objex
project.
> But I
> think that a successful system should have a practical angle first of
> all (*ahem* Hurd *ahem*).
>
Undoubtedly!
> --
> Stay tuned,
> MhZ JID: mo...@ja...
>
>
_____________________________________________________________
Dr. Andrew Lipnitsky
e-mail: er...@li...
Web: http://www.lipnitsky.org
See also: http://www.objex.org
|
|
From: Mikhail Z. <mh...@al...> - 2001-11-13 22:57:54
|
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 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... |
|
From: Andrew L. <er...@li...> - 2001-11-16 13:26:09
|
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
|
|
From: Mikhail Z. <mh...@al...> - 2001-11-16 20:22:39
|
Hello Andrew, On Fri, Nov 16, 2001 at 03:25:07PM +0200, Andrew Lipnitsky wrote: > > 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). Well, I hope it will not take eternity to run an app there :) You mentioned JVM; I recall that Sun actually had that JavaOS project in development, but they folded it and resorted to the 'traditional OS + JVM' formula. Even on handheld/embedded devices, it's usually Linux and Java 2 Micro Edition. I wonder why. Probably, it's because you gotta have native code for many tasks. -- Stay tuned, MhZ JID: mo...@ja... ___________ Politics are almost as exciting as war, and quite as dangerous. In war, you can only be killed once. -- Winston Churchill |
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X