[self-interest] Only one SELF?

Stefan Matthias Aust sma at 3plus4.de
Thu Nov 18 23:59:38 UTC 1999

No.  I really appreciate Gordon's work on porting Self to Linux (and of
course Dave's work on doing the Mac port) but at least for me, this system
isn't want I want right now.  So there's the need for more than one system.

I also see the danger of splitting up too few people, but I see no better
way and to at least share the knowledge of about implementing such systems
which is nearly as good as sharing the code.

I like the comparision of Self and Mozilla.  I agree with who wrote that
Self suffers from the same problems as Mozilla.  Open source projects tend
to work out only if enough developers follow the project from shortly after
the beginning so they can learn the code.  Self is too big.  I looked into
the code a few times - mainly to find all primitives defined by Self and
reading that code isn't easy.

C or C++ aren't the right languages to write large pieces of code.  It's
better to use a high level language (at least pure C is just a portable
assembler IMHO) and then automatically transform the code.  The reduces the
amount of code and helps people to get an understanding.

So if we want to go for one SELF, I dare to say that we'd basically have to
do the same as the Mozilla people did - starting all over.  Perhaps, if we
come up with a modular and portable base architecture, it's worth a try.

Stefan Matthias Aust  //  Bevor wir fallen, fallen wir lieber auf.

More information about the Self-interest mailing list