I've been playing with UML recently. Personally, I could take it or leave it.
The biggest problem with UML is that it immediately separates the people who work with it from the people that don't. That's a bad thing in a diverse environment, IMHO. Now if the POE object layer could be written in a way such that you can reverse engineer/generate UML, then that would be much more agreeable and useful, in my view. Instant documentation is good. - MW -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 2:55 PM To: Rocco Caputo Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Object System On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 03:33:23PM -0500, Rocco Caputo wrote: > On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 05:56:35PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 10:50:25AM -0500, Matt Cashner wrote: > > > On (02/08/02 16:38), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > [etc.] > > Man, this is SO far off topic. Get a room, or at least a new Subject. well ... > == Inheritance and aggregation. == > > We'll have no end of trouble doing practical things in an object > system that doesn't cleanly support ways to combine objects. > > I've begun compiling a list of pattern inheritance and combining > patterns as I come across them. Hopefully some clean patterns will > emerge from those notes. It's slow work, and it could use input from > more people. I would suggest taking a look at the UML notitian. I is not perfect and not the only model, but it is quite popular, a lot of people work on and with it and it is still being improved. We can build something that lets us declare object interaction/aggregation/ composition/inheritance in UML(-like) notation. This code should also provide easy access and maintenance of all its features like object associations. Cons: -Only some people know it -It needs to be done (the code) -Slightly different to normal Perl OOP Pros: -standards for: notation, terms in conversations, behaviour -provides several often used patterns related to object interaction -sound and existing model -easier to get tool support from third parties -basis for other things, like OCL, inspection, interfaces, ... -no need for direct object references to interact > > == Threads. == > > Threads are listed last because they are the most important, least > visible, and hardest to do correctly. > > Threads will let sessions block without adversely affecting other > sessions. That will open a lot of CPAN to POE users, which is a very > nice thing. Combined with messaging, it will let POE act as a form of > RPC for other modules. That's good, too. > > Artur Bergman is working on a "dream design" (I hope) for threaded > POE. We'll hash out how close POE's current design can approach his > fondest wishes without breaking. Are there any notes online about this ? What I would like to have is not just threads but real distributed POE applications, in a transparent way. Please comment on wether you'd like that too. And on what you think this means, as I have the feeling that we're talking about different things when using the word distributed or concurrency. For me that means running the same program on several boxes distributed across the world. Something like that :) > > Mission statement. > > Mission statements suck, but it occurred to me that we might need > something to focus on. I know I do. Do I EVER. How does this sound? > > Create a coherent, extensible framework for object interaction. That's like saying we need good code. But it's fine for a mission statement. I'd like to add something. I am usually the one who says "this is bad, this won't work, you/that will fail when it gets bigger, ...". stuff like that. it is _not_ my intention to decrease your motivation, or decrease the worth of people's work. it is just that i know what can go wrong, and what does not work. and often i don't know how to do correctly or at least not immediately after i complained. the point is, a lot of people don't like the way i approach problems. but this isn't meant as an offense. is there a need to properly proof what i'm talking about? because sometimes i got the feeling that i cant transform all my thoughts into clear english text that everyone understands. if there should be a test candidate POE::NFA would be perfect :) so if my mails sound crappy and off-topic to you, please tell me. torvald
