Thomas Beale wrote:
>Andrew po-jung Ho wrote:
>> Horst, it doesn't matter how awesome Eiffel is or whether it is or is not
a fully fledged compilable OO language.  There are lots of compilable, full
OO languages in the year 2000.
>
>Name one (no university languages allowed). Then let's talk about "full
OO".

Smalltalk. 
http://www.squeak.org 
http://www.pocketsmalltalk.

I recently ran across a couple of Open Source implementations of Smalltalk
that I find absolutely intriguing, partly because both are at least
partially compiled and capable of running on PDA's. Squeak has some
similarity to SmallEiffel and ISE in that it compiles itself to C as needed.
I plan to look at them in detail either in my spare time or after I move our
MUMPS based HIS onto a fully Open Source MUMPS platform, whichever comes
first. ;-)


>Eiffel/GEHR is not
>trying to be elitist; it is trying to inject real quality into systems
>which can indeed be used by everyone.

Which brings us back to GT.M and VistA... ;-)
Perhaps the strongest feature of GT.M appears to be its proven flexible high
performance scalable database engine designed for 24x365 operation. It
provides a simple C level interface which could be easily accessed from 
Eiffel/GEHR. One possibility that would provide is direct access to VistA
data and metadata from GEHR and vice versa. That could benefit both VistA
and GEHR.



>> >The damage B. Meyer has done to Eiffel with his rather unqualified
>> >statements regarding free software and the open source community is hard
to
>> >repare - but then, without him there wouldn't have been an eiffel in the
>> >first place. Still, this might explain why this otherwise excellent
language
>> >has not taken off in the o.s. community as much as it would deserve.
>
>This is one of those areas where one has to separate the author's personal
viewpoint from the technical offering (and there were some valid points by
the way). I'm not sure if it has had any effect, since I would be surprised
to learn that many people had read this paper.

I read it when the topic hit this list, as I am sure did many others who had
been favorably impressed with your arguments for Eiffel. It left an
indelible impression. The damage is deep. People must read it themselves. 

I remain interested in the language but my enthusiasm is depressed.

---------------------------------------
Jim Self
Manager and Chief Developer
VMTH Computer Services, UC Davis
(http://www.vmth.ucdavis.edu/us/jaself)

Reply via email to