Hey Chris, I think if we try to extract and (minimally) generalize the Prima object system, we'll give Stevan a highly performant C-based object system upon which to build p5-mop. If ever there was a time to introduce a minimal C object system into the Perl core, p5-mop would be it.
As an added bonus, if we get involved in this sort of effort, we can lend more manpower to the effort, which has usually been a two-man show. This will increase the likelihood that p5-mop gets fully implemented, and bring some more awareness to PDL. But then again, I've spoken about Prima's object system and not successfully extracted it (yet). Eo is written, a known and tested quantity. It just strikes me as a profound coincidence that p5-mop still hasn't been finalized, and we're bandying about the notion of a new C-based object system for PDL. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that this is a moment to be seized. Why not merge forces? David On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 3:36 PM, Chris Marshall <devel.chm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi David- > > I think if we start trying to get something in the perl5 core we'll > rediscover the pain that Stevan Little found. Right now my thought was to > use the existing perl5 MOP (i.e., Mo[o[se]) to generate the PDL::Tiny > classes and using that information to generate the C object > binding/implementation. I'm looking at the Enlightenment Object model as a > starting point for the C object model to avoid re-inventing the wheel. One > nice thing there is that the EO library can be called from either C or > *real* C++ code so you can have the best of both worlds without the problem > of forcing the use of a specific C++ compiler everywhere.... > > --Chris > > > On 1/8/2015 20:41, David Mertens wrote: > >> Hey Chris, porters, >> >> I was thinking again about this project. One thing that occurs to me is >> that p5mop-redux, Stevan Little's attempt at creating something like Moose >> that could be pushed into core Perl, has been stalled for many months. I am >> not sure if p5mop-redux has a very good C API; indeed, I am not sure if it >> has a C object API at all. I wonder if we might consider stepping in an >> lending a hand to help build a C object API, which would serve as the >> foundation for the mop. >> >> If we had a solid C object system with the high potential of getting >> pushed into the core, we would be in excellent shape to create the next >> generation of PDL. >> >> Thoughts? >> David >> >> > -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." -- Brian Kernighan
_______________________________________________ Perldl mailing list Perldl@jach.hawaii.edu http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
