[Self-interest] orthogonal persistence, single-level store, transparent persistence

[Jack Waugh]

In response to
http://lists.selflanguage.org/pipermail/self-interest/2020-November/004754.html

I am fairly convinced that the Self language and all other imperative
languages are inappropriate for orthogonal persistence (a. k. a.
single-level store, transparent persistence). I'm (very slowly and
haltingly) pursuing a concurrent-constraint language for that environment.
Not many people seem to be working toward the single-level store. There is
the Hoon language, but I find it hard to read. Also, the way Hoon is used
is supposed to be, and I'm sure is, deterministic. The approach I favor
would be deterministic by default, but could pass around an authority to
conduct races.

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 8:10 AM Baltasar García Perez-Schofield
baltasarq-at-gmail.com |pub yahoo| <xampm300qe0om7t at sneakemail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> > What do you mean by a true persistent system?
>
> An orthogonal persistence system determines the orthogonal roots of
> persistence, calculates their persistent closure (the set of objects
> needed for the former to make sense), and stores and retrieves them
> on/from disk in a transparent way.
>
> A memory snapshot more or less does the trick, but, as happens in the
> case of Self, involves a much bigger memory size to deal with. It also
> makes it more difficult to share a set of objects (data), with other
> people, which I guess that is the transporter is for.
>
> -- Baltasar
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Self-interest mailing list
> Self-interest at lists.selflanguage.org
> http://lists.selflanguage.org/mailman/listinfo/self-interest
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.selflanguage.org/pipermail/self-interest/attachments/20201129/d2ced3ad/attachment.html>