RE: AW: The world needs process-orientation

[tjoccam@xxxxxxxxxxx]

> And mine,
>
> Nice to read stuff from Tony again, he always has a practical view of
> what was required underpinned by sound engineering practice!
> <SNIP>
> The coding is in Groovy, a scripting language that runs on the Java
> platform for which I have created a number of helper classes that make
> it easier to write parallel systems.  A brief description of the
> relationship between Groovy and occam is given in
> http://www.wotug.org/paperdb/send_file.php?num=136
>
> Jon
>
> Jon Kerridge
> Napier University Edinburgh

Jon and all,

I took a cursory look at the Groovy and occam paper, and the thing that
struck me is that the class stuff looks like boilerplate, i.e. "class x
implements CSProcess {" looks to be functionally equivalent to "PROC x (
)" in occam. If this sort of thing could be formalized (i.e. so an
auto-translator could work), it would reduce OO to near-harmlessness. Then
a path to writing occam harness equivalents could open up doors.

I like the idea of a scripting language. A robust OS connection that
forces it to be sane in resource usage could make scripting harnesses
possible. All of these things might be possible by using a SUBSET of
currently available stuff, chosen so that all the metaphoric garbage
design is excluded.

Larry Dickson