Re: [TCLCORE] TIP #377: Portably Determining the Number of Processors in the System

[Andreas K. <and...@ac...>]

Steve Landers wrote:
> On 20/09/2010, at 11:56 PM, Andreas Kupries wrote:
> 
>>> On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Joe English <jen...@fl...> wrote:
>>>> Donald G Porter wrote:
>>>>> Gustaf Neumann wrote:
>>>>>> i like the idea of the ensemble in terms of extensibility.
>>>>>> if we go that way, using
>>>>>> "info hardware ..." would be even nicer, leaving room for
>>>>>> "processor", "memory".
>>>>> I think this is all moving in the right direction.  Then,
>>>>> whenever it gets settled what the right name for this ensemble
>>>>> should be, say [info foo], then please take the next step and
>>>>> take it out of the [info] command, and make this ensemble
>>>>> either [::foo] or [::tcl::foo].
>>>> +1.
>>>>
>>>> I'd go a step further and suggest moving it out
>>>> into a separate module.  This seems like a prime
>>>> candidate for the new pkgs/* hierarchy, especially
>>>> if (as seems likely) it's going to grow into a
>>>> general-purpose hardware query facility.
>> I thank you all for your contributions in this thread, having read them all.
>>
>> I will go with Joe's suggestion of creating a proper package first, and then we 
>> can see how many need it and whether integration deeper than tcl/pkgs/ is 
>> warranted.
> 
> Should that be part of the platform package, which itself could be a candidate for moving into tcl/pkgs ?

Of the two things I see in this sentence I agree that the platform package 
could be moved into pkgs/.

Merging with the proposed 'hardware' package I am much more ambivalent about, 
with trending towards 'not a good idea'. The 'hardwae' stuff will be only 
needed by those using threads, and wanting to write code which is adaptive. The 
'platform' package on the other hand is useful to a much broader audience. All 
binary packages, either as part of slicing and dicing a multi-architecture 
repository like TEapot, or in packages which can be multi-architecture, like 
those generated by critcl. As such I do not believe that it is a good idea to 
couple these two together.

What could be done is having them in related namespaces, so that they look 
related, without being actually coupled to each other.


-- 
Andreas Kupries
Senior Tcl Developer
ActiveState, The Dynamic Language Experts

P: 778.786.1122
F: 778.786.1133
and...@ac...
http://www.activestate.com
Get insights on Open Source and Dynamic Languages at www.activestate.com/blog