Self-interest January 2002

self-interest@lists.selflanguage.org

14 participants
13 discussions

Self/R not started yet - some plans
by Jecel Assumpcao Jr 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

2001 was a "hardware year" for me and I haven't written yet the first line of code for Self/R. I did work a little on its design and have posted a Swiki address here with more information. Just a quick review in case someone has no idea what I am talking about: Self/R is supposed to be a reflective implementation of Self. What Self does with a C++ virtual machine, Self/R would do in Self itself with "meta objects". That makes some things easier - if you want to add a new kind of message to Self 4.1.4 you will have to change some source text files, recompile everything and restart Self to see the effect. In Self/R you would get the use all the great tools available in that environment and would be able to see the effect of your changes while the system is running. I think everyone can agree that this is a very good thing to have. But I have been thinking a lot about "the community", as John and Albertina have put it. It would be very desirable for us all to work together around a single code base instead of having two separate implementations (which would be worse than having two lists ;-). So I have been trying to evaluate how far I can go by adding Self/R features to Self 4. There are some things that have nothing to do with reflection and could be written in Self 4 without any changes at all to the virtual machine: 1) the 3D and Zooming graphical user interface 2) the extensible event system 3) multi natural language support 4) simpler graphical syntax The next two would require patching the C++ code, but I don't think they would be too much trouble: 5) primitive objects instead of primitive messages 6) the cache manager The last one might be possible to do in C++, but it would be a really major project: 7) the persistent object store/virtual memory/security/viewpoints The problem with doing things in this order is that 6 and 7 can make possible a different Self programming style that would make 1-4 much simpler. I won't go into details about what each of the projects listed above actually is unless there are people interested in them. Note that having 1-7 would make Self 4 more interesting for my project and do most of what I want reflection for, but it still wouldn't be Self/R. But as the saying goes, "perfect is the enemy of good enough". Until recently I simply had to have a "Self in Self" compiler to get my hardware to work. Self/R would have to be built in any case. But I have now changed my design (it is now less Transmeta-like and more PicoJava-like, though that is a very poor analogy) and a "black box" virtual machine (like Self 4) looks like a reasonable option for running the same software on normal computers as I do on my hardware. So for now "Self/R" will mean "Self 4 running on my hardware". In the hope of helping keep the community together I will put off having it mean "Self in Self" as long as I can. Does this make any sense? Cheers, -- Jecel

1 1

Re: Self ported to Linux
by Jecel Assumpcao Jr 02 Feb '02

02 Feb '02

On Monday 28 January 2002 02:48, alban read wrote: > Despite all the hype about the self compiler it actually runs like > a total dog (Self 4.1 on the Mac anyway). > It has to be ten times slower than Squeak and is too slow to be > useful. (Which is a shame) There is a lot of confusion about this. Since this is getting off topic for Squeak, I am sending a copy to the Self list so any discussion can continue over there. On the other hand, the subject might be of interest to jittery Squeakers ;-) The famous Self compiler that ran numerical benchmarks at 50% the speed of optimized C was introduced in Self 2.0 and was created by Craig Chambers. The result is simply amazing when you consider that C does no index or overflow checking and had a far better code generator. Craig's compiler was a huge leap forward in type analysis and he has continued this work in his Vortex Compiler project (for the Modula 3 and Cecil languages). The problem was that compilation was slow and so interactive use of Self 2 wasn't very nice. The compiler didn't do such a great job in highly polymorphic (very OO styled) benchmarks. In Self 3 and 4 an entirely different direction was taken by Urs H�lzle. Two simple compilers replaced the complex one used previously, and type analysis was replaced with type feedback. The first compiler (NIC, the Non Inlining Compiler) did a quick and dirty job that allowed code to start running. Data structures called PICs (Polymorphic Inline Caches) improved the performance of message sending and, as a side effect, collected information about the types of objects actually used in the various call sites in the code. When a given method was identified as being critical to system performance (a "hot spot", hence the name of the technology given at Animorphics and included in Java 2) the second compiler (SIC, the Simple Inlining Compiler) was called to generate much better code. Though the type information available in the PICs was just a subset of what could be obtained with type analysis, it was good enough for the SIC to do a good job very quickly. This new system did a better job on real applications and is far better for interactive use, but it doesn't get the fantastic benchmark results that Self 2 did. When porting Self to a new system, you can get it running by just implementing the NIC. Performance will be terrible since no inlining or type feedback will be used and these two are the key technologies in Self. For example, a simple "[...] whileTrue: [...]" will involve many message sends and block context creations *per loop*. Contrast that with Squeak where the compiler will generate optimized jump bytecodes instead. Unfortunately, neither the Power Mac nor the Linux PC ports implement the SIC, yet. David Ungar says performance is good enough on his PowerBook and a previous version (4.1.2) seemed almost reasonable on a 233 MHz iMac. The current version (4.1.4) is supposed to improve performance, but it seemed very slow on the 600 MHz iBook I tried it on (it wouldn't run on the iMac's OS 8.6). So I am afraid you haven't had a chance to see Self either as it was (Self 2) or how it is meant to be (NIC+SIC). At least for now, I am keeping my UltraSparc :-) -- Jecel

5 10

AOP, conceptualization, metaphor, etc
by Albertina Lourenci 20 Jan '02

20 Jan '02

Dear Researchers: > > I am an architect generating sustainable cities by computer. > Since 1997 when I first met Kiczales I have been trying to > understand aspect-oriented programming. Last year at ECOOP'01 > in Budapest I enjoyed myself telling Eric Dalesdale that all he said > sounded like Greek to me!!!I have never had any problems before > in trying to understand a programming language, but this time > it was a great challenge to me. Little by little I got used to the idea > because obviously it is of the utmost importance. > After having read Lucena's paper [reached me via Jim Coplien] > and your intriguing paper's [ Tomoji and Natsuko's] I am delighted! > The latter deal from aspect-oriented analysis and aspect oriented design > > and the former accomplishes a huge synthesis between class-based > languages, multi-agent approach and aspect oriented programming > Moreover Carlos feels the need for dealing with patterns! > > I am a fan of the prototype based object oriented language SElf! > Why? Because architectural and urban design looks like Chinese!!! > I mean it is plastic, not hierarchical!!! > When we design 90% of the work is accomplished at what we call > free-hand sketch. > In this phase of the design, metaphor in the direction of design > patterns > and even dream is fundamental to open the black box that is imagination! > > But when we have to draw, the necessary tools resemble rather those > of embedded systems. I hope I am being able to convey my ideas. > There is no more interactive and cooperative language (due to the Kansas > > screen, a virtual reality that allows each researcher to sit side by > side > and see what the other is doing it doesn't matter where he is in the > world) > as far as I know than Self. Wonderful for emphasizing humans as first > order > components in Software as Alistair Cockburn proposes! > [Well Jim Coplien spearheaded the design movement and the need to treat > software as an art] > At Ecoop'01 there was a consensus if we don't start things at the level > of > the analysis and design, all this stuff like aspect oriented programming > > and separation of concerns would not really lead to evolutive, easy to > evolve > software! > > Now nature and culture enters in! Why because they rest on life and > language! > Both are capable of double articulation, I mean the ability to create > out of > finite things infinite things! > It is not necessary to say that molecular biology and semiotics are > highly hermetic > fields!!!If you do not know physics, chemistry, mathematics and computer > science > little can be done when you deal with the genetic code!!!! > Now to deal with semiotics means to be aware of SAussure, Hjelmslev, > Peirce, > Greimas to name the most famous theoreticians! And not forget about > linguists > such as Bloomfield, Chomsky, Chafe and so on!!! > Poor of our small brain!!! > My current interest is: > a) Should we treat each phase of a knowledge (software) system [domain > model, architectural > model and implementation code] as a language, > I mean with semantic and syntactic components responsible for narrative > and > discursive structures or > b) Should we treat the knowledge [software system] as a unique language? > > Moreover a very interesting semiotician and mathematician is Petitot > Cocorda who deals > with Greimas and catastrophe theory and whose work may throw light to > answer the > above questions! > > I believe several heads thinking are better than one, so please feel > free to enable mankind > to be beyond this challenge! Sure our today's Minotaure!!! > Have a fun-filled, peaceful, creative weekend > Albertina > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: your intriguing paper from IWPSE'01 > Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 01:11:28 +0900 > From: Tomoji Kishi <kishi(a)mvd.biglobe.ne.jp> > Reply-To: kishi(a)aj.jp.nec.com > To: Albertina Lourenci <lourenci(a)lsi.usp.br> > CC: n-noda(a)cw.jp.nec.com > References: <3C46EEBF.2CD43927(a)lsi.usp.br> > > Dear Albertina, > > Thank you for having interests on our research. > I have attached the SPLC1 2000 paper, and our > recent paper accepted by Asia-Pacifc Software > Engineering Conference (APSEC 2001). > > We also have interested in your research. > Would you please send me the report ? > I am happy if you send me the report dividing > into smaller parts, say less than 1 Mbytes per > mail. > > Regards, > > Tomoji Kishi > > >I regret I have not met you in Vienna. However I am deeply > >interested in aspect-oriented analysis. Would you mind e-mailing > >me your intriguing paper ASpect-oriented analysis for product line > >architecture SPLC1 2000? > >I have just finished writing my Scientific Report where I show the > >relevance of multi-paradigm design and the need to include aspects > >as one of the paradigms in the prototype based Self language!! > >I need your paper rather urgently!!! > >If you get interested I can e-mail my Scientific Report in PDF format. > >It is about > >3,5 Mbytes. > > > >Thanks for your kind attention. > >Albertina > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Name: SPLC_kishi.pdf > SPLC_kishi.pdf Type: Acrobat (application/pdf) > Encoding: BASE64 > > Name: APSEC2001kishi.PDF > APSEC2001kishi.PDF Type: Acrobat (application/pdf) > Encoding: BASE64 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Albertina Lourenci <lourenci(a)lsi.usp.br> > PHD in Architecture and Urbanism > Laboratory of Integrated Systems - Polytechnic School > Department of Electronic Systems Engineering > > Albertina Lourenci > PHD in Architecture and Urbanism <lourenci(a)lsi.usp.br> > Laboratory of Integrated Systems - Polytechnic School > Department of Electronic Systems Engineering > Av. Prof. Luciano Gualberto, Trav 3 # 158 Fax: +55123031 4574 > São Paulo Home: +55113818 5362/ 3813-1419 > SP Work: Laboratory of Integrated Systems - Polytechnic School USP > 05508-900 > Brazil > I am buiilding a prototype-based object oriented knowledge systems to generate sustainable cities > Additional Information: > Last Name Lourenci > First Name Albertina > Version 2.1 Albertina Lourenci PHD in Architecture and Urbanism Laboratory of Integrated Systems - Polytechnic School Department of Electronic Systems Engineering <lourenci(a)lsi.usp.br> Av. Prof. Luciano Gualberto, Trav 3 # 158 São Paulo SP 05508-900 Brazil Fax: +55123031 4574 Home: +55113818 5362/ 3813-1419 Work: Laboratory of Integrated Systems - Polytechnic School USP I am buiilding a prototype-based object oriented knowledge sys-- .----------------------------------------------------------. | Albertina Lourenci | | PhD in Architecture and Urbanism | | post-doctorate researcher | | Laboratory of Integrated Systems University of Sao Paulo | | Avenida Professor Luciano Gualberto, 158 Travessa 3 | | CEP: 05508-900 | | Sao Paulo Sao Paulo State Brazil | | Voice: +55 011 818 5254 | | Fax: +55 11 211 4574 | .----------------------------------------------------------.

1 0

aspect-oriented programming and Self
by Albertina Lourenci 20 Jan '02

20 Jan '02

Dear Researchers: I am an architect generating sustainable cities by computer. Since 1997 when I first met Kiczales I have been trying to understand aspect-oriented programming. Last year at ECOOP'01 in Budapest I enjoyed myself telling Eric Dalesdale that all he said sounded like Greek to me!!!I have never had any problems before in trying to understand a programming language, but this time it was a great challenge to me. Little by little I got used to the idea because obviously it is of the utmost importance. After having read Lucena's paper [reached me via Jim Coplien] and your intriguing paper's [ Tomoji and Natsuko's] I am delighted! The latter deal from aspect-oriented analysis and aspect oriented design and the former accomplishes a huge synthesis between class-based languages, multi-agent approach and aspect oriented programming Moreover Carlos feels the need for dealing with patterns! I am a fan of the prototype based object oriented language SElf! Why? Because architectural and urban design looks like Chinese!!! I mean it is plastic, not hierarchical!!! When we design 90% of the work is accomplished at what we call free-hand sketch. In this phase of the design, metaphor in the direction of design patterns and even dream is fundamental to open the black box that is imagination! But when we have to draw, the necessary tools resemble rather those of embedded systems. I hope I am being able to convey my ideas. There is no more interactive and cooperative language (due to the Kansas screen, a virtual reality that allows each researcher to sit side by side and see what the other is doing it doesn't matter where he is in the world) as far as I know than Self. Wonderful for emphasizing humans as first order components in Software as Alistair Cockburn proposes! [Well Jim Coplien spearheaded the design movement and the need to treat software as an art] At Ecoop'01 there was a consensus if we don't start things at the level of the analysis and design, all this stuff like aspect oriented programming and separation of concerns would not really lead to evolutive, easy to evolve software! Now nature and culture enters in! Why because they rest on life and language! Both are capable of double articulation, I mean the ability to create out of finite things infinite things! It is not necessary to say that molecular biology and semiotics are highly hermetic fields!!!If you do not know physics, chemistry, mathematics and computer science little can be done when you deal with the genetic code!!!! Now to deal with semiotics means to be aware of SAussure, Hjelmslev, Peirce, Greimas to name the most famous theoreticians! And not forget about linguists such as Bloomfield, Chomsky, Chafe and so on!!! Poor of our small brain!!! My current interest is: a) Should we treat each phase of a knowledge (software) system [domain model, architectural model and implementation code] as a language, I mean with semantic and syntactic components responsible for narrative and discursive structures or b) Should we treat the knowledge [software system] as a unique language? Moreover a very interesting semiotician and mathematician is Petitot Cocorda who deals with Greimas and catastrophe theory and whose work may throw light to answer the above questions! I believe several heads thinking are better than one, so please feel free to enable mankind to be beyond this challenge! Sure our today's Minotaure!!! Have a fun-filled, peaceful, creative weekend Albertina

1 0

aspect-oriented programming
by Albertina Lourenci 20 Jan '02

20 Jan '02

1 1

Perl (was: still about the list)
by Jecel Assumpcao Jr 18 Jan '02

18 Jan '02

On Thursday 17 January 2002 17:29, Ned Konz wrote: > On Thursday 17 January 2002 05:07 pm, Jecel Assumpcao Jr wrote: > > I am really not looking forward to some Perl hacking. Tripp's > > proposal sounds more attractive. > > Though you could look into our Class::Prototyped Perl module and do > it in a Self-like style... But I doubt that the Majordomo authors used this style. If you were talking about starting from scratch, then I would rather do something in Squeak as I am already running Swiki/Comanche on my server. Prototypes and blocks.... what will these Perl people think of next? ;-) -- Jecel

1 0

Re: New Mailing-List self@cichon.com
by John Hinsley 17 Jan '02

17 Jan '02

Jecel Assumpcao Jr <jecel(a)merlintec.com> wrote: //snipped// > > > > Right, if the two lists could be linked then people would have a choice > > and it would still be just one group. The problem with Yahoo is that we > > have little control over it and I don't think that Gordon could do a > > bidirectional link entirely on his side. There would have to be some > > amount of custom header mangling to both break mail loops and bypass > > the "only members can post" restrictions. It is a lot harder than I > > first thought. //snipped// Thanks for the history of the list, Jecel. Seems that I've been far too hard on Gordon et al. Apologies. I wonder if there is a manual work-around for this? Seems to me that if both lists could provide a digest, then it would be relatively easy to post the digest of one group to the other (and vice versa). While this could never have the immediacy of a pair of bi-directional lists, it would seem to offer a way of keeping the community together (pending the invention of a super-script). Hell, I'd volunteer to do it but I'm up to my eyeballs in (unpaid for) Squeak stuff. I'll offer to do it on a "relief for main forwarder" basis, though. What do people think? Cheers John

4 3

New Mailing-List self@cichon.com
by gordontemp0815 16 Jan '02

16 Jan '02

Hi all, Yahoo Groups seriously sucks. I can't neither subscribe it on my Linux account, nor can I use the web interface with internet junk buster. David and all the Sun guy have trouble posting, too. So, I set up my own mailing list. Please come and join if you like to hear what I can contribute to the discussion. :-) It is set up with majordomo pretty quick, so please send a mail "subscribe" to majordomo(a)cichon.com. It asks you for confirmation, so please send exactly the string it wants to have as reply without any leading ">"s when hitting reply. See you all there, hopefully. :-) All the best, Gordon.

5 6

Re: Re: New Mailing-List self@cichon.com
by John Hinsley 16 Jan '02

16 Jan '02

Jecel Assumpcao Jr <jecel(a)merlintec.com> wrote: > Gordon Cichon write: > > So, I set up my own mailing list. Please come and join if you like to > > hear what I can contribute to the discussion. :-) > > I don't think having two separate lists is a good idea. Of course, I > see that having control is very important. But Yahoo does have some > nice features like digests, web browsing, archives and searching. > > It is possible to host "remote groups" at Yahoo (see Squeak, for > example) so you still have most features but get to manage the list > directly using Majordomo. The problem is that this is not > bidirectional, so everyone in the current list would have to > individually move over to yours (posting via Yahoo would no longer be > possible). > > In the Majordomo FAQ I see that there is a gateway program for linking > your list to a newsgroup, but I don't see anything about another list. > > What do the other list members think? I'm inclined to think that one group is enough! Holy cow, I find the Squeak list difficult enough to keep up with! IIRC, I subscribed through Linux (with Netscape) and I do find it usefull to be able to visit the archive for the Squeak group (also at Yahoo, also with Netscape) -- actually a pretty essential resource, as all bugfixes and goodies are there, too. But, then. I don't use junkbuster (never needed to). Potentially splitting the community for the sake of busting a tiny nut seems _way_ OTT to me unless you, that is, "gordontemp0815" can come up with a bidirectional script which works (and implement it ;-) Cheers John -- Jecel

2 1

www.cupidmagic.com
by good4you94560 11 Jan '02

11 Jan '02

My friend recommended a very good web site for dating service which is based in the San Francisco bay area. I would like to share it with you. It is www.cupidmagic.com. Why do not you just try it (it provides up to 15 days free trial)?

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

Self-interest January 2002