Nathan Davis wrote: > On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Michael Sparks <[email protected]> wrote: > > > * Preferably not cause a rewrite of existing code (!) > > Actually, I've already written a partial implementation of my ideas that > builds on top of Kamaelia in its current form. The initial results are very > encouraging, and I haven't seen anything so far that would indicate we would > need to make changes that would break existing code. I'll post the code for > the group shortly, after I've cleaned it up a little. Implicit in this is something I've been thinking of... that possibly Kamaelia is best used as an systems level library that higher level abstractions can be built upon. Kamaelia is very flexible, more so than many applications need. Higher level abstractions can take that general purpose flexibility and concentrate it on certain domains.
So it might be premature to bundle much higher levels of abstraction as they might preclude other types. -- John Eikenberry [[email protected] - http://zhar.net] [PGP public key @ http://zhar.net/jae_at_zhar_net.gpg] ______________________________________________________________ "Perfection is attained, not when no more can be added, but when no more can be removed." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
