No registered users in community xowiki
in last 10 minutes
in last 10 minutes
[Xotcl] RE: Snit TIP
From: Jeff Hobbs <jeffh_at_ActiveState.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 17:29:52 -0700
> In fact, I'd be pleased to see Snit in the core - I really like the
> delegation model and I intend to start using Snit more in the future.
I'm not sold on snit, although we do use it. I want to have
the opportunity to look into xotcl more in actual use. It
has had a lot more large applications built with it, and has
been "harder hit" (at least that's my impression).
Why? Because it is similar to snit, similarly it is a
"Tcl-friendly OO model", but already done in C, even to the
point of performance tweaking. People like snit because the
model is good, and they can drop it in anywhere because it is
pure Tcl.
However, a true core OO should be done in C. xotcl is that
already. Sure, you can code parts of snit in C - but xotcl
is already there *and tested*. It has active developers and
interested users. It's even gone so far as to have an alpha
"itcl compatability" mode that actually faster than the C
coded itcl!
So why have I been slow in including it? Well, until v1.2
the build system was not TEA friendly. I strongly believe
in extensions that behave as extensions, and it behaved as if
xotcl was the world. Also, key to AS work in usage only, the
TDK Compiler does not know how to precompile (hide/obfuscate)
xotcl methods, so it wouldn't be too hard to go poking in our
code (which we don't want ;) ).
Please note that this message crosses 3 mailing lists, so be
conscious of who is on the to/cc for your replies.
Jeff
PS - Of course we still love Will's snit, which is why it
actually made it into our code, but when we talk "core OO",
there are different criteria to go by.
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 17:29:52 -0700
> In fact, I'd be pleased to see Snit in the core - I really like the
> delegation model and I intend to start using Snit more in the future.
I'm not sold on snit, although we do use it. I want to have
the opportunity to look into xotcl more in actual use. It
has had a lot more large applications built with it, and has
been "harder hit" (at least that's my impression).
Why? Because it is similar to snit, similarly it is a
"Tcl-friendly OO model", but already done in C, even to the
point of performance tweaking. People like snit because the
model is good, and they can drop it in anywhere because it is
pure Tcl.
However, a true core OO should be done in C. xotcl is that
already. Sure, you can code parts of snit in C - but xotcl
is already there *and tested*. It has active developers and
interested users. It's even gone so far as to have an alpha
"itcl compatability" mode that actually faster than the C
coded itcl!
So why have I been slow in including it? Well, until v1.2
the build system was not TEA friendly. I strongly believe
in extensions that behave as extensions, and it behaved as if
xotcl was the world. Also, key to AS work in usage only, the
TDK Compiler does not know how to precompile (hide/obfuscate)
xotcl methods, so it wouldn't be too hard to go poking in our
code (which we don't want ;) ).
Please note that this message crosses 3 mailing lists, so be
conscious of who is on the to/cc for your replies.
Jeff
PS - Of course we still love Will's snit, which is why it
actually made it into our code, but when we talk "core OO",
there are different criteria to go by.