[EVALUATION] - E01: The Java Failure - May Ruby Helps?
Ilias Lazaridis
A cooperation between Sun Microsystems and IBM&Co. in conjunction with
liberal & high evolutive communities would result in an nearly
unbeatable programming platform.
My evaluation has shown: this is a non achievable goal, as stubborness
and egoism rules - instead of reason and cooperation.
Thus I leave all those ridiculous folks behind, which will continue to
do an excellent job in keeping the very promising JAVA platform far
below the technological level it could be
"
-
"
Of course It's a sad day.
Censorship (NetBeans, Eclipse) has forced me to move.
No platform is _really_ open, thus I cannot build on them:
http://lazaridis.com/core/project/open.html
"
-
"I'm sure there is one community out there which will realize immediatly
the benefits of an high-evolutive system. "
-
source: [messages within thread]
[JAVA] [EVALUATION] - The Java Failure (Sorry: The Java(tm) Failure)
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.java.softwaretools/msg/ae6315fda51d50a1
-
-
-
During the 6 months evaluation i've extracted several constructs.
"How it should be to become high evolutive"
-
I don't know Ruby.
Basicly I would like to do everything in C++.
But development must go quicker.
-
Possibly it's time to structure Ruby projects in a way similar to
Sun's Java, NetBeans and especially IBM&Co's Eclipse (but of course more
efficient and evolutive):
http://lazaridis.com/case/ide/project/index.html
www.osgi.org and similar standards should (whenever possible) be used.
Companies in the Embedded World should be intrested in an Ruby osgi
implementation.
[Note: i've not verified technical and legal applicability]
-
osgi is just a detail.
The goal would be: to make a high competitive andhigh evolutive
programming platform / Rich Client Platform based on Ruby.
-
My question is essentially:
How many of those constructs are already supported by Ruby (and the
surrounding open-source-projects):
http://lazaridis.com/case/stack/index.html
-
I'll be possibly for some time off-line, as the evaluation has brought
me to my financial limits, thus i'm loosing my phone-line in a few hours.
I'll try to communicate via internet-cafe, but cannot promise this.
-
Please notify the people within the relevant Ruby communities about
this thread.
.
Kaspar Schiess
Welcome to the Ruby language.
Your post tells a tale of a lot of personal frustration and of a lot of
conflicts with people in other open source communities. While I certainly
see what you are talking about in your message (although it is rather
long and requires some in depth reading), I cannot share your vision of
things. I don't think the Java community is entirely bad and the way it
has reacted to you cannot entirely be blamed on them. Wanting to say: You
have a very upfront way of dealing with things that some people might
understand as an offense.
> My question is essentially:
>
> How many of those constructs are already supported by Ruby (and the
> surrounding open-source-projects):
>
> http://lazaridis.com/case/stack/index.html
and
> I don't know Ruby.
>
> Basicly I would like to do everything in C++.
>
> But development must go quicker.
give me mixed feelings about what to answer you. Yes, Ruby possibly
supports a great many of the things you mention, but if it does not, that
would be the time to learn Ruby and build some things yourself. That's
the way it works - you can't demand things to be built. Some of us are in
on this on daytime jobs, but most of us do this for free - so the phrase
'developement must go quicker' is really useless.
Not offering any advice here apart from that, since I don't want to
thread loose another long discussion about how things should be 'run'.
Please be assured of my best intentions,
kaspar
hand manufactured code - www.tua.ch/ruby
Hal Fulton
>
>>I don't know Ruby.
>>
>>Basicly I would like to do everything in C++.
>>
>>But development must go quicker.
>
>
> give me mixed feelings about what to answer you. Yes, Ruby possibly
> supports a great many of the things you mention, but if it does not, that
> would be the time to learn Ruby and build some things yourself. That's
> the way it works - you can't demand things to be built. Some of us are in
> on this on daytime jobs, but most of us do this for free - so the phrase
> 'developement must go quicker' is really useless.
Kaspar,
I agree with most of what you say here.
I think however that when he said "development must go quicker" he meant
that his own development must be quicker than he can manage in C++ (hence
the interest in Ruby).
Cheers,
Hal
Kaspar Schiess
> I think however that when he said "development must go quicker" he meant
> that his own development must be quicker than he can manage in C++ (hence
> the interest in Ruby).
Seen like this the phrase makes of course sense. I stand corrected.
Ilias Lazaridis
[...]
> My question is essentially:
>
> How many of those constructs are already supported by Ruby (and the
> surrounding open-source-projects):
>
> http://lazaridis.com/case/stack/index.html
Can please some community member has the gentleness to give me an answer
on this?
The evaluation sequence is a very standard case, thus your answers will
be usable to other newcomers, too (e.g. if you create a
ruby-real-live-quick-start-document):
http://lazaridis.com/case/stack/index.html#evaluation
.
gene...@gmail.com
Stephen Kellett
gene...@gmail.com writes
>Hmm, much warmer reception than c.l.python
You should check out comp.lang.java subhierarchy. Real roasting there.
Stephen
--
Stephen Kellett
Object Media Limited http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk
RSI Information: http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk/rsi.html
Martin DeMello
To be fair, his evaluation form does look like it'd be a useful
document if filled in.
martin
Ilias Lazaridis
[...]
> My question is essentially:
>
> How many of those constructs are already supported by Ruby (and the
> surrounding open-source-projects):
>
> http://lazaridis.com/case/stack/index.html
From the communities behaviour, I extract the following answer:
"
Ruby is not what you are searching for. It is not capable to replace
JAVA and it's large base of libraries and open source system
implementations.
The existent Ruby tools cannot produce the defined stack, which
essentially describes some form of an coherent open-source MDA (Model
Driven Architecture) implementation.
Ruby is for having fun - but not for producing serious large scale
distributed applications.
Otherwise the people here would have simply answered: welcome, pick
this, this and this, add this and this and your stack is ready.
"
.
Sam Roberts
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> [...]
> >My question is essentially:
> >
> >How many of those constructs are already supported by Ruby (and the
> >surrounding open-source-projects):
> >
> >http://lazaridis.com/case/stack/index.html
> [...]
>
> From the communities behaviour, I extract the following answer:
I would extract this:
You have a project. You need to evaluate tools for your project. Other
people are not going to do this evaluation for you.
If I told you "ruby and its libs will do everything you want", what
would you do then? Believe me, somebody you know nothing about? Start a
major coding effort, based on free advice?
Cheers,
Sam
Douglas Livingstone
I don't really understand what your question is, so I can't help you.
The way you have random dashes dots and quotation marks in your post
makes me think that you do not take your questions seriously, it looks
like one of those v!&gr@ messages.
Parhaps if you clearly stated what it is you are looking for you might
get a better response. From here, it sounds like you don't know what
you want and you don't want to know what is on offer. It is quite
difficult to try and solve those problems without being you.
Douglas
Ilias Lazaridis
We are humans.
Thus we can ask, if we don't understand something.
Please let me know which point you've not understood.
the described system:
http://lazaridis.com/case/stack/index.html
describes mostly state-of-the-art integrated commercial development
systems, nothing more.
I just want to know, which of the constructs are supported within the
ruby world: which systems exist and which would I have to implement myself.
> Douglas
.
Ilias Lazaridis
> I would extract this:
>
> You have a project. You need to evaluate tools for your project. Other
> people are not going to do this evaluation for you.
>
> If I told you "ruby and its libs will do everything you want", what
> would you do then? Believe me, somebody you know nothing about? Start a
> major coding effort, based on free advice?
Please do not disrupt the obious context.
I (a newcomer) ask the community about existing systems.
This is really nothing special.
It helps me, it helps the community.
Luke Graham
those too ;)
> ..
>
> --
> http://lazaridis.com
>
>
Luke Graham
example. Persistent code is possible with some hacking, Ive done
something that at least looks like persistent Ruby code from a
distance, if you squint ;) Databases work. I use Ruby to generate C
code, so you can make generators with it. Its open-source. It can be
used remotely, there are packages around to send code across networks.
You can get stuck into a reasonable amount of metadata for a language
that isnt written in itself. Anything else you really want to know?
Austin Ziegler
> Some of it is possible. I have created persistent Ruby objects, for
> example. Persistent code is possible with some hacking, Ive done
> something that at least looks like persistent Ruby code from a
> distance, if you squint ;) Databases work. I use Ruby to generate C
> code, so you can make generators with it. Its open-source. It can be
> used remotely, there are packages around to send code across networks.
> You can get stuck into a reasonable amount of metadata for a language
> that isnt written in itself. Anything else you really want to know?
For everything except persistent code (e.g., persistent object state),
you can use any number of options. However, for persistent object code
(that is, saving the code behind a method), I think that the new work
by Ryan Davis and Eric Hodel — especially the new AST to Ruby
generator that was featured on RedHanded is probably a very good idea.
I wouldn't be surprised if you could get the AST, store that, and then
use the generator to restore and then #eval the resulting code later.
-austin
--
Austin Ziegler * halos...@gmail.com
* Alternate: aus...@halostatue.ca
Ilias Lazaridis
> Some of it is possible. I have created persistent Ruby objects, for
> example. Persistent code is possible with some hacking, Ive done
> something that at least looks like persistent Ruby code from a
> distance, if you squint ;) Databases work. I use Ruby to generate C
> code, so you can make generators with it. Its open-source. It can be
> used remotely, there are packages around to send code across networks.
> You can get stuck into a reasonable amount of metadata for a language
> that isnt written in itself. Anything else you really want to know?
Yes, I would like to know if all this you have done is based on some
implemetations which are standard within the ruby community.
I would like something like:
create object
...
make it persistent with XYZpersist
obj.save ...
make a gui with XYZgui
obj. ...
...
and so on.
-
something, that I could give a newcomer to ruby (which knows object
orientation), and he could start immediatly to be productive.
.
[...]
>>>http://lazaridis.com/case/stack/index.html
>>>
>>>describes mostly state-of-the-art integrated commercial development
>>>systems, nothing more.
>>>
>>>I just want to know, which of the constructs are supported within the
>>>ruby world: which systems exist and which would I have to implement myself.
.
Ilias Lazaridis
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 17:49:18 +0900, Luke Graham <spo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Some of it is possible. I have created persistent Ruby objects, for
>>example. Persistent code is possible with some hacking, Ive done
>>something that at least looks like persistent Ruby code from a
>>distance, if you squint ;) Databases work. I use Ruby to generate C
>>code, so you can make generators with it. Its open-source. It can be
>>used remotely, there are packages around to send code across networks.
>>You can get stuck into a reasonable amount of metadata for a language
>>that isnt written in itself. Anything else you really want to know?
>
> For everything except persistent code (e.g., persistent object state),
> you can use any number of options.
Can you name me a few, which would fulfill my stated requirements? [like
OOAD, scalability etc.]
> However, for persistent object code
> (that is, saving the code behind a method), I think that the new work
> by Ryan Davis and Eric Hodel — especially the new AST to Ruby
> generator that was featured on RedHanded is probably a very good idea.
> I wouldn't be surprised if you could get the AST, store that, and then
> use the generator to restore and then #eval the resulting code later.
This sounds _very_ intresting to me, but I have to limit my evaluation
based on the current needs
http://lazaridis.com/case/stack/index.html
Simply stated:
how can I create objects.
how can I make them persistent.
how can I create a generic GUI
how can I create a generic Web GUI
how can I update the object model
...
.
Christian Neukirchen
Sometimes, I'd love Object#marshal_io=, to make it save everything
automatically... that would rock.
> -austin
> --
> Austin Ziegler * halos...@gmail.com
> * Alternate: aus...@halostatue.ca
>
--
Christian Neukirchen <chneuk...@gmail.com> http://chneukirchen.org
Martin DeMello
>
> Simply stated:
>
> how can I create objects.
> how can I make them persistent.
> how can I create a generic GUI
> how can I create a generic Web GUI
> how can I update the object model
> ...
If what you're looking for is a full stack web framework, check Rails
out - it does a really good job of designing the various parts to
interact well with each other from the outset. It let me throw together
a trivial CRUD app in a week, two days of which were spent on Apche
issues. I've not used Nitro or Wee, but I've heard good things about
both of those too.
Non-web GUIs - http://www.rubygarden.org/ruby?ComparingGuiToolkits
As for objects, it's nigh impossible to use Ruby *without* creating
them :)
Surfing the Rubygarden wiki and the newsgroup archives should garner you
a lot more.
martin
Austin Ziegler
<il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
> Austin Ziegler wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 17:49:18 +0900, Luke Graham <spo...@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>> Some of it is possible. I have created persistent Ruby objects,
>>> for example. Persistent code is possible with some hacking, Ive
>>> done something that at least looks like persistent Ruby code
>>> from a distance, if you squint ;) Databases work. I use Ruby to
>>> generate C code, so you can make generators with it. Its
>>> open-source. It can be used remotely, there are packages around
>>> to send code across networks. You can get stuck into a
>>> reasonable amount of metadata for a language that isnt written
>>> in itself. Anything else you really want to know?
>> For everything except persistent code (e.g., persistent object
>> state), you can use any number of options.
> Can you name me a few, which would fulfill my stated requirements?
> [like OOAD, scalability etc.]
Your stated requirements are exceedingly vague, which makes it hard
to recommend anything in particular, and I think that's part of the
reason that your posts have not received much attention. It does
*not* help that the format is hard to read and that the wording is
(as I said) vague and buzz-wordish.
>> However, for persistent object code (that is, saving the code
>> behind a method), I think that the new work by Ryan Davis and
>> Eric Hodel — especially the new AST to Ruby generator that was
>> featured on RedHanded is probably a very good idea. I wouldn't
>> be surprised if you could get the AST, store that, and then use
>> the generator to restore and then #eval the resulting code
>> later.
> This sounds _very_ intresting to me, but I have to limit my
> evaluation based on the current needs
I'm not sure what you mean here, and what I'm talking about is a
specific capability that I believe is able to be implemented through
Ruby2C project offshoots.
I will attempt to address your questions -- mostly with questions
because I find your questions/requirements exceedingly vague.
> http://lazaridis.com/case/stack/index.html
The first question I have is -- what real solution are you trying to
solve? Ultimately, the first paragraph of your linked page that
you're not trying to solve a *real* problem, but rather trying to
get a sense of what is possible and already available on various
languages.
> [simple] how can I create objects.
> [simple] how can I make them persistent.
> [simple] how can I create a generic GU
> [simple] how can I create a generic Web GUI
> [simple] how can I update the object model ....
What do you mean by this? If you simply want to create a class and
then instances of the class, it's very simply:
class Foo
... # define your attributes and methods here[1]
end
x = Foo.new
I'm not sure what you want beyond that. I've got several extensive
projects -- as do many other people here -- which do a lot of object
creation. My most complex example? PDF::Writer -- which is the
*nastiest* object hierarchy that I've ever had to deal with, and
it's because PDF is such a nasty, self-referential language.
Persistence? Well, that depends on your persistence mechanism and
framework. By default, as long as you don't have custom *executable*
code that you need to save with your objects (e.g., callbacks), all
Ruby objects are persistable.
You can use the Marshal mechanisms (Marshal#dump and Marshal#load),
you can write something yourself (as I did with Ruwiki::Exportable)
or you can use YAML (thanks, _why) or XML (thanks SER). Ruby
contains the PStore mechanism by default and the standard
distribution provides dbd, sdbm, and gdbm backends.
If you want live object stores, there's Madaleine (I think Anders B
wrote this; there's actually two implementations of the concept, but
this is the one that Instiki currently uses).
If you want SQL-database backed stores you can choose from the DBI
interfaces (providing Oracle, MySQL, Postgres) or other database
interfaces (SQLite comes to mind).
Don't want to interact with an SQL database directly? There's Og
(thanks George), ActiveRecord (thanks Dave), Lafcadio (thanks
Francis, and isn't there a Postgres equivalent by someone else?),
and probably a few others that I've missed. ActiveRecord also
integrates nicely with my own Transaction::Simple module that
provides in-memory transaction support (which I must say is pretty
darn cool).
Og and ActiveRecord have application frameworks that surround them
(Nitro and Rails, respectively), too, and they can be plugged into
other frameworks with varying degrees of success and difficulty (Wee
comes to mind, thanks Michael). Speaking of application frameworks,
there's also Borges (thanks Eric), Iowa (thanks Kirk), and several
others which I've heard mentioned but have never even looked at.
Most of these contain templating engines, too, or use one of several
other templating engines available -- Arrow (or is that a
application framework), PageTemplate, the rdoc templating system
(built into Ruby's distribution), ERB, Amrita, and others.
Let's see -- that takes care of application frameworks, object
creation and persistence and web UIs. With DRb, you can even build
cluster support pretty easily -- and I wouldn't be surprised if the
breakpoints framework that Florian Gross introduced could be made
even cooler with DRb. Somehow. If it isn't already that cool,
because Florian's a really cool guy and I can't keep up with
everything that he does.
GUI support? Well, it's a bit harder to have a generic GUI in Ruby.
You can use Tk, but it's really not that pretty -- it won't look
like anyone else's toolkit and I don't like using Tk applications.
For some cross-platform GUI handling, you can use QtRuby, gtk-ruby,
ruby-gnome, WxRuby (thanks Kurt and others), and the venerable
FXRuby (thanks Lyle). I haven't used anything but FXRuby, but it
took me less than two days to get an application running that
supported either a command-line interface or a Windows GUI interface
with FXRuby. Lyle was great in helping me to figure out a lot of
this stuff. If you're not as interested in cross-platform stuff,
then on Windows you can use swin and visualuruby; on MacOS X you can
use the Cocoa bindings for Ruby.
Generally, when you're creating an object model in Ruby, you have to
design it by hand -- no UML tool outputs to Ruby (and UML is based
around static class modeling in any case, so it's not an appropriate
tool for Ruby projects). That's not nearly as big a deal as it
sounds. Meta-programming is very easy in Ruby. I'm doing a bit of
work with XBEL (XML Bookmarks Exchange Language) and I ported
something from Python in about an hour -- and then I went on and
created an XBEL::Node object that parses the XBEL information into
Ruby objects in 41 lines of beautiful Ruby code. I think it could be
30 lines if I took out some XBEL-specific code I have in there.
Ruby is the *perfect* choice for doing a lot of this stuff -- but
there's a lot of choice out there, and you have to know a bit what
you want to accomplish before the extremely helpful community can
actually, you know, provide help.
There's even some really cool technologies that Jamis Buck has done
-- inversion of control in two different implementations (Needle
looks interesting, but I still haven't played with it) and Net::SSH
with Net::SFTP support. Indeed, Net::SSH can deal with the issue of
remote deployment for you.
FWIW, there's one thing that I'd recommend against very strongly --
you have a line-item in your requirements list about "migrade
ORM/RDBMS to OODBMS." There's no such thing as a good OODBMS or
XMLDBMS. You will *always* get better performance, flexibility, and
scalability from a good relational database. OODBMS locks you into a
particular data format (and it's one of the reasons that, although
Madaleine is a cool technology and implementation, I think that
prevalence databases are a very bad idea) that makes it hard to
migrate real data. I've got a much longer rant on this that I did a
year and a half ago or so on ruby-talk.
There's a lot more, but the biggest problem that I see is that your
requirements are so vague that just about anything could fulfill
them. It's all a matter of how much pain you want to go through.
Ruby decreases the pain you want to go through. Some of the
technologies are new, but I've seen more well-designed code from the
Ruby community than in the entire rest of my career.
-austin
[1] This is something that is able to be disputed. In Ruby,
"attributes" are simply methods that are defined specially and
appear to simply be attributes because Ruby encourages a
principle of uniform access.
Stefan Schmiedl
Austin Ziegler <halos...@gmail.com> wrote:
... a very impressive 100-line who's who and what's what that I'll be
keeping for some time.
Thanks, Austin.
Lyle Johnson
> .... a very impressive 100-line who's who and what's what that I'll be
> keeping for some time.
I was thinking the same thing (and not just because my name was
mentioned). A really nice run-down of a lot of the Ruby-based
technologies out there. We should probably archive this on the Wiki,
no?
craig duncan
I've seen the "maybe that should go on the wiki" response quite a few times. My
thought about that, though, is when i have problems, i do google searches. I've
found a lot of answers in ruby-talk but i've never found anything from the wiki.
There's probably a very obvious reason for that. But the point is that when someone
suggests putting something on the wiki, from my point of view (and that's all it is)
it's useless there. If an answer appears in ruby-talk, though, then its useful to
me. I find it. My problem is solved.
Anyone ever consider that angle of things? It's nice when you _do_ run across
material that's worth reading and you're interested enough in to read it, but i (and
many others, i would guess) tend to be problem driven, wanting to find the answer to
a specific problem. And in order to _find_ things that way, you google (or other)
search and whatever you come up with is pretty much the domain of what you have to
look through for answers.
?
Lyle Johnson
<craig-...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> I've seen the "maybe that should go on the wiki" response quite a few times. My
> thought about that, though, is when i have problems, i do google searches. I've
> found a lot of answers in ruby-talk but i've never found anything from the wiki.
> There's probably a very obvious reason for that.
I was going to explain my take on this, but by the time I got finished
reading your post it was pretty clear that you already know the
answer. ;)
If I know what it is I'm looking for, and I'm just not sure where to
find it, I use Google. For the most part, Wikis are more useful (to
me) for accidentally stumbling across interesting things. For example,
I might visit a Wiki and see that article X has been updated recently,
so I scan it just to see what it's about. That article links to
article Y on the same Wiki, and so I follow the link, and sometimes
serendipity kicks in and I find something interesting.
Robert Klemme
"Lyle Johnson" <lyle.j...@gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:d4cf71b005021...@mail.gmail.com...
Sounds like an implementation of ManualBot... :-))
robert
craig duncan
>>find it, I use Google. For the most part, Wikis are more useful (to
>>me) for accidentally stumbling across interesting things. For example,
>>I might visit a Wiki and see that article X has been updated recently,
>>so I scan it just to see what it's about. That article links to
>>article Y on the same Wiki, and so I follow the link, and sometimes
>>serendipity kicks in and I find something interesting.
>
>
> Sounds like an implementation of ManualBot... :-))
>
> robert
So, i guess the joke implies that there is no "known" way to make the valuable info
collected on a wiki available for searching?
My obvious and total ignorance may be showing because i've never (that i recall)
visited the wiki site... ever. The (however good or bad) reason being that it never
came up in a google search. I should go and browse some, i suppose... when i find
the time. :-) Maybe it has a search feature that i should remember to include in my
repetoire of searching behaviors when i go looking for information relating to the
specific thing i'm working on. ?
Robert Klemme
"craig duncan" <craig-...@earthlink.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:4212271E...@earthlink.net...
> Robert Klemme wrote:
> > "Lyle Johnson" <lyle.j...@gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> >
> >>If I know what it is I'm looking for, and I'm just not sure where to
> >>find it, I use Google. For the most part, Wikis are more useful (to
> >>me) for accidentally stumbling across interesting things. For example,
> >>I might visit a Wiki and see that article X has been updated recently,
> >>so I scan it just to see what it's about. That article links to
> >>article Y on the same Wiki, and so I follow the link, and sometimes
> >>serendipity kicks in and I find something interesting.
> >
> >
> > Sounds like an implementation of ManualBot... :-))
> >
> > robert
>
> So, i guess the joke implies that there is no "known" way to make the
valuable info
> collected on a wiki available for searching?
That's not what I indended to convey. It was just a joke on Lyle's
crawling style. Basically this is the style that most humans follow, I
guess.
> My obvious and total ignorance may be showing because i've never (that i
recall)
> visited the wiki site... ever. The (however good or bad) reason being
that it never
> came up in a google search. I should go and browse some, i suppose...
when i find
> the time. :-) Maybe it has a search feature that i should remember to
include in my
> repetoire of searching behaviors when i go looking for information
relating to the
> specific thing i'm working on. ?
I think usually you can search a wiki although some seem to try to hide
the search dialogue...
robots.txt could be a reason for not being indexed.
Kind regards
robert
Ilias Lazaridis
[...]
>>[simple] how can I create objects.
>>[simple] how can I make them persistent.
>>[simple] how can I create a generic GU
>>[simple] how can I create a generic Web GUI
>>[simple] how can I update the object model ....
> What do you mean by this? If you simply want to create a class and
> then instances of the class, it's very simply:
>
> class Foo
> ... # define your attributes and methods here[1]
> end
>
> x = Foo.new
-
I simply need to produce software.
You have described many systems.
Java has hundreds, possibly thousands of it.
But you cannot produce software with those technologies, when you have
the requirement "OOAD", "scalable", "embeddable", and some others that
i've described (which essentially are nothing special).
-
Isn't there any _bundle_ of those Ruby technologies that you listed,
which are verified, which allow a simple software production, without
the need of research & plumbing?
Just Download & start?
.
Thomas E Enebo
>
> I simply need to produce software.
>
> You have described many systems.
>
> Java has hundreds, possibly thousands of it.
>
> But you cannot produce software with those technologies, when you have
> the requirement "OOAD", "scalable", "embeddable", and some others that
> i've described (which essentially are nothing special).
>
> -
>
> Isn't there any _bundle_ of those Ruby technologies that you listed,
> which are verified, which allow a simple software production, without
> the need of research & plumbing?
>
> Just Download & start?
What Java bundles exist where you just download and start? Especially
that does a fraction of what you are talking about. Many frameworks and
tools exist in Java, but they all require research and I cannot think
of a single-stop solution. Enterprise highly scalable stuff exists for
java, but that stuff is never really simple software production. It also
always seems to need plenty of plumbing.
Your requirements seem more like an outline for a corporate white
paper than a real-world use case for software development. At least
with the amount of detail you have. Perhaps you could revise your
research a little to collate and organize a list of ruby software that
could be combined into a "dream" system (people have been trying to help you
fill out such a list)? Maybe provide more concrete considerations why some
of the technologies fall short?
-Tom
--
+ http://www.tc.umn.edu/~enebo +---- mailto:en...@acm.org ----+
| Thomas E Enebo, Protagonist | "A word is worth a thousand |
| | pictures" -Bruce Tognazzini |
Ilias Lazaridis
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Ilias Lazaridis defenestrated me:
>
>>I simply need to produce software.
>>
>>You have described many systems.
>>
>>Java has hundreds, possibly thousands of it.
>>
>>But you cannot produce software with those technologies, when you have
clarification: i wrote "cannot"
>>the requirement "OOAD", "scalable", "embeddable", and some others that
>>i've described (which essentially are nothing special).
>>
>>-
>>
>>Isn't there any _bundle_ of those Ruby technologies that you listed,
>>which are verified, which allow a simple software production, without
>>the need of research & plumbing?
>>
>>Just Download & start?
>
> What Java bundles exist where you just download and start? Especially
> that does a fraction of what you are talking about. Many frameworks and
> tools exist in Java, but they all require research and I cannot think
> of a single-stop solution. Enterprise highly scalable stuff exists for
> java, but that stuff is never really simple software production. It also
> always seems to need plenty of plumbing.
One reason for leaving JAVA.
> Your requirements seem more like an outline for a corporate white
> paper than a real-world use case for software development. At least
> with the amount of detail you have.
This is an evaluation template with standard requirements (they are
really nothing special, if you read them).
> Perhaps you could revise your
> research a little to collate and organize a list of ruby software that
> could be combined into a "dream" system (people have been trying to help you
> fill out such a list)?
I've not the domain knowledge to do so.
The ruby community has the domain-knowledge to fill it in.
As stated at the begin of this thread:
this is a simple cooperation.
> Maybe provide more concrete considerations why some
> of the technologies fall short?
sounds good.
> -Tom
.
Austin Ziegler
<il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
> Austin Ziegler wrote:
> [...]
>>> [simple] how can I create objects.
>>> [simple] how can I make them persistent.
>>> [simple] how can I create a generic GU
>>> [simple] how can I create a generic Web GUI
>>> [simple] how can I update the object model ....
> [...]
>> What do you mean by this? If you simply want to create a class
>> and then instances of the class, it's very simply:
>>
>> class Foo
>> ... # define your attributes and methods here[1]
>> end
>>
>> x = Foo.new
> [...]
Right. But the production of software is something that is very
dependent upon the problem space you are trying to use it in.
> You have described many systems.
>
> Java has hundreds, possibly thousands of it.
>
> But you cannot produce software with those technologies, when you
> have the requirement "OOAD", "scalable", "embeddable", and some
> others that i've described (which essentially are nothing
> special).
Right. There are two words which you have that are (by and large)
contradictory: scalable and embeddable. Not only that, by
themselves, these words have NO MEANING WHATSOEVER. If I have an
application that works well if one person or 100 people are using
it, then it's scalable. Or do you mean 10,000 people simultaneously?
There are different levels of scalability and different meanings. Do
you want it to be parallel scalability (e.g., thousands of
simultaneous users) or data scalability (e.g., terabytes of data) or
something else entirely?
Embeddable technologies, moreover, are known for their small
footprint, which doesn't often turn into massive scalability.
Rails is a highly scalable application framework. Nitro appears to
be a highly scalable application framework. They're both
web-oriented, which makes them very hard to use with non-web user
interfaces. They're both database oriented, which makes them hard to
use with non-database persistence. Rails performs very badly under
some conditions (CGI environments), but performs as well or better
than very expensive Java application frameworks when configured
properly (FCGI environments, others).
> Isn't there any _bundle_ of those Ruby technologies that you
> listed, which are verified, which allow a simple software
> production, without the need of research & plumbing?
No. Then again, there's no such thing for Java, Python, C++, C,
Delphi, or anything else, either. Smart software designers design
their software to the problem space and then generalise from there,
if they can.
There is no software out there which you can simply wire together
into an application. You have to actually pick and choose based on
the needs of your current project.
-austin
Thomas E Enebo
> Thomas E Enebo wrote:
> >On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Ilias Lazaridis defenestrated me:
> >
> >>I simply need to produce software.
> >>
> >>Just Download & start?
> >
> > What Java bundles exist where you just download and start? Especially
> >that does a fraction of what you are talking about. Many frameworks and
> >tools exist in Java, but they all require research and I cannot think
> >of a single-stop solution. Enterprise highly scalable stuff exists for
> >java, but that stuff is never really simple software production. It also
> >always seems to need plenty of plumbing.
>
> One reason for leaving JAVA.
Fair enough. As a follow up question...Have you found any technology
suite that has fullfilled your requirements list?
Ilias Lazaridis
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Ilias Lazaridis defenestrated me:
>
>>Thomas E Enebo wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Ilias Lazaridis defenestrated me:
>>>
>>>>I simply need to produce software.
>>>>
>>>>Just Download & start?
>>>
>>> What Java bundles exist where you just download and start? Especially
>>>that does a fraction of what you are talking about. Many frameworks and
>>>tools exist in Java, but they all require research and I cannot think
>>>of a single-stop solution. Enterprise highly scalable stuff exists for
>>>java, but that stuff is never really simple software production. It also
>>>always seems to need plenty of plumbing.
>>
>>One reason for leaving JAVA.
>
>
> Fair enough. As a follow up question...Have you found any technology
> suite that has fullfilled your requirements list?
not yet.
I'm evaluating some python stuff, but the reaction of the community on a
simple questionaire has distracted me very mouch.
[EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f5cd74aa26617f17
-
If i find e.g. 70% fo my requirements fulfilled within ruby, I would
possibly start to implement the remaining 30%.
But possibly I should split my requirements down into smaller chunks,
and ask step by step.
Ilias Lazaridis
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 02:24:52 +0900, Ilias Lazaridis
> <il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
>
>> Austin Ziegler wrote: [...]
>>
>>>> [simple] how can I create objects. [simple] how can I make them
>>>> persistent. [simple] how can I create a generic GU [simple] how
>>>> can I create a generic Web GUI [simple] how can I update the
>>>> object model ....
>> [...]
>>
>>> What do you mean by this? If you simply want to create a class
>>> and then instances of the class, it's very simply:
>>>
>>> class Foo ... # define your attributes and methods here[1] end
>>>
>>> x = Foo.new
>>
>> [...] I simply need to produce software.
>
> Right. But the production of software is something that is very
> dependent upon the problem space you are trying to use it in.
of course.
I've defined my needs in the presented document (essentially a form of
Model Driven Architecture (MDA)).
>> You have described many systems.
>>
>> Java has hundreds, possibly thousands of it.
>>
>> But you cannot produce software with those technologies, when you
>> have the requirement "OOAD", "scalable", "embeddable", and some
>> others that i've described (which essentially are nothing special).
>>
>
> Right. There are two words which you have that are (by and large)
> contradictory: scalable and embeddable.[...]
It is not contradictory.
i'm asking that the design can be transformed:
"
# Initial design runs on local client.
# Ability to transform design to run on higher grade systems
* High Load Systems (load balancing, clustering )
* large scale OODBMS
# Ability to transform design to run on embedded devices.
"
> Rails is a highly scalable application framework.
ok
> Nitro appears to be a highly scalable application framework.
ok
> They're both web-oriented, which makes them very hard to use with
> non-web user interfaces.
ok.
This would mean: "requirements met, except local GUI"
> They're both database oriented, which makes them hard to use with
> non-database persistence.
rembember:
I can contribute.
If not existent, I could e.g. write an persistency abstraction for the
mentioned frameworks, thus others can plug-in persistence drivers.
> Rails performs very badly under some
> conditions (CGI environments), but performs as well or better than
> very expensive Java application frameworks when configured properly
> (FCGI environments, others).
ok
>> Isn't there any _bundle_ of those Ruby technologies that you
>> listed, which are verified, which allow a simple software
>> production, without the need of research & plumbing?
>
> No. Then again, there's no such thing for Java, Python, C++, C,
> Delphi, or anything else, either.
This is false.
Commercial systems exist, mostly very expensive.
-
No such thing exist with the requirement "open-source".
I'm still wondering: which will be the first open-source-language
community which will realizes this and bundles this package, at least
with a partly grade.
> Smart software designers design
> their software to the problem space and then generalise from there,
> if they can.
I think you are over-generalising.
Personally, I prefere to use case-tools.
The problem is, that open-source fails to produce them:
http://lazaridis.com/core/product/case.html
> There is no software out there which you can simply wire together
> into an application. You have to actually pick and choose based on
> the needs of your current project.
Even if it is this way:
Pick & pack should be simpler.
> -austin
.
Wes Moxam
[snip]
This guy has been asking these sorts of questions on various
comp.lang.* lists. He's been banned from several. I hate to be an ass,
but I really think this thread is a waste of time.
http://groups-beta.google.com/groups?q=Ilias+Lazaridis&start=40&
-- Wes
Ilias Lazaridis
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 04:14:52 +0900, Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> This guy has been asking these sorts of questions on various
> comp.lang.* lists. He's been banned from several. I hate to be an ass,
> but I really think this thread is a waste of time.
Mr. Moxam,
is it possible that i've invested all this time to do this research and
to write everything down on my website, just for having some fun on some
forums?
http://lazaridis.com/core/index.html
> http://groups-beta.google.com/groups?q=Ilias+Lazaridis&start=40&
You do not inform anyone about something new.
Simply review my original message, where I point to 3 communities which
have censored me.
I ask you friendly to avoid further off-topic posts.
> -- Wes
.
Austin Ziegler
<il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
>> Right. But the production of software is something that is very
>> dependent upon the problem space you are trying to use it in.
> of course.
>
> I've defined my needs in the presented document (essentially a
> form of Model Driven Architecture (MDA)).
Then very few languages will do what you want, and they pretty much
are brought to you by the letters M, S, and B.
>>> You have described many systems.
>> Right. There are two words which you have that are (by and large)
>> contradictory: scalable and embeddable.[...]
> It is not contradictory.
We could go on like this, but emphatically, with a LOT of SE
experience behind me, they are contradictory. Embeddable databases
don't scale well, and to wring performance out of them, they often
end up using features that don't correspond to larger database
engines. Examples? SQLite -- a really good embeddable RDBMS --
doesn't implement the full SQL language (I think it might support
most SQL89, but not SQL92, but I don't recall). MySQL explicitly
*breaks* significant portions of SQL compatibility.
Reality number one: the so-called portable SQL database application,
isn't. If your SQL database application is portable, it uses the LCD
of database features or has separate ORDBMS layers implementing the
various features that are present in one database but not another.
And *that's* just if you're talking about embeddable databases. If
you need to do embedded systems programming, you're in even more
trouble, because most
[...]
>>> Isn't there any _bundle_ of those Ruby technologies that you
>>> listed, which are verified, which allow a simple software
>>> production, without the need of research & plumbing?
>> No. Then again, there's no such thing for Java, Python, C++, C,
>> Delphi, or anything else, either.
> This is false.
>
> Commercial systems exist, mostly very expensive.
Actually, Ilias, it is 100% accurate. There is no system in
existence -- no CASE tool in existence -- which will allow you to:
1) generate any random application in the world that can use an
embedded database or an external database and perform well in any
use case; and
2) program against platform-agnostic GUI to run on systems from Sun
to Linux to Windows to MacOS X to PalmOS or even something
embedded in your toaster, OR run as a web application at whim.
That's basically what you're wanting. There's no such commercial
application and there's no such open source application. Why?
Because such a tool would SUCK. As every single CASE tool in
existence has ever done. CASE tools generally require that you run a
very large runtime, program *their* way, often in *their* language
(which isn't related to anyone else's), and then tend to fall behind
both operating system releases and the technology curve.
Dick Davies
> Wes Moxam wrote:
> >On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 04:14:52 +0900, Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >This guy has been asking these sorts of questions on various
> >comp.lang.* lists. He's been banned from several. I hate to be an ass,
> >but I really think this thread is a waste of time.
>
> Mr. Moxam,
>
> is it possible that i've invested all this time to do this research and
> to write everything down on my website, just for having some fun on some
> forums?
Yes, yes it is.
You've got an awful lot of detailed information from some very helpful and
patient people, so maybe it's time to actually try the language now?
--
'Oh how awful. Did he at least die peacefully? ....To shreds you say, tsk tsk tsk.
Well, how's his wife holding up? ....To shreds, you say...'
-- Prof. Farnsworth
Rasputin :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns
Ilias Lazaridis
> * Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com> [0250 19:50]:
>>Wes Moxam wrote:
>>>On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 04:14:52 +0900, Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>This guy has been asking these sorts of questions on various
>>>comp.lang.* lists. He's been banned from several. I hate to be an ass,
>>>but I really think this thread is a waste of time.
>>
>>Mr. Moxam,
>>
>>is it possible that i've invested all this time to do this research and
>>to write everything down on my website, just for having some fun on some
>>forums?
>
> Yes, yes it is.
>
> You've got an awful lot of detailed information from some very helpful and
> patient people, so maybe it's time to actually try the language now?
no, it not the time.
Please avoid further off-topic replies.
.
Ilias Lazaridis
[...] - (increased complexity, lost context)
I'm sorry, I cannot continue the discussion.
-
I just ask the community to point at least to an clear overview of the
building-blocks which I can use within ruby.
As stated in another message:
"
If i find e.g. 70% fo my requirements fulfilled within ruby, I would
possibly start to implement the remaining 30%.
But possibly I should split my requirements down into smaller chunks,
and ask step by step.
"
-
So, most possibly I have to go this way.
Asking step by step.
.
Austin Ziegler
Okay. I'm through.
If you're not going to go through and actually look at the *extensive*
list of technologies in Ruby that I provided you and actually *try*
the language, then you're not worth any more of my time. Your
requirements are vague, unrealistic, and indicative of someone not
familiar with software development. There's no silver bullet for you
in Ruby. Yes, you will have to do some -- likely quite a bit -- work.
But you'll enjoy writing your software more in Ruby than probably in
any other language.
People who are developing a web application are typically not
developing a GUI or CLI application at the same time. If they are,
then they're developing a service (perhaps a "web service") and
different front ends for said service (e.g., they develop the business
logic in the service and then provide GUI, WUI, and CLI interfaces to
it). It's how I'll be doing Bug Traction when I get around to it
again. When I get PDF::Writer ready for release, I'll put a web
front-end around part of it, too.
I choose various technologies based on the needs that I have. Ruwiki
solves some of those. PDF::Writer solves others. I have a half-dozen
*other* projects that I have written, and various little utilities,
too, that solve other problems. People use the things that I write in
surprising ways -- I was quite surprised to hear that Hieraki uses
Text::Format (and to whomever was talking to me about that last month,
I'm not ignoring Text::Format changes that I've promised, either --
I'm just very much overloaded right now).
It *is* time for you to sit down and see if any of the pieces
mentioned will work well enough for you to fill in the gaps for your
stated needs. It's not *our* responsibility to provide them to you on
a silver platter wrapped in gold foil with a satin bow. The individual
technologies exist out there. They haven't been made into the fictive
jamStack because it turns out that no one else has needed them. If you
need them, *you* figure out which of those dozen or so projects I
mentioned yesterday fit your needs.
Until then, I'm done. You aren't providing specifics and you're being
quite silly in your expectations. It's time for you to do some work
for yourself.
Tim Ferrell
would require more time and effort on your part than just asking "blind" questions or submitting a (vague) list of requirements for comment, but others will
usually be more open to help if they can see more effort on the part of the one asking...
That being said, I would look at this differently if I were in your position. Rather than searching for a language that "does it all" (or 70%, as you said)
I would look for a language that is capable enough to meet the requirements, but moreover, something that truly makes life as a developer more productive
and less stressful, you know? That is the kind of language I would want to base a framework on - even if I had to develop it myself.
Of course, that really explains why I am a Ruby developer in the first place... I don't like having to wrestle with a language to make it behave :-)
Cheers ... and good luck on your search.
Tim
> ..
>
Ilias Lazaridis
[...]
>>Please avoid further off-topic replies.
>
>
> Okay. I'm through.
>
> If you're not going to go through and actually look at the *extensive*
Sorry, but I did not read your writings.
You increase the complexity in a direction which is not of any relevance
for me.
I've replied a few times
My courtesy for replying to off-topic and off-context comments [of the
community in general] has its limits.
.
E S
> Aihe: Re: [EVALUATION] - E01: The Java Failure - May Ruby Helps?
>
> Austin Ziegler wrote:
> [...] - (increased complexity, lost context)
>
> I'm sorry, I cannot continue the discussion.
>
> -
>
> I just ask the community to point at least to an clear overview of the
> building-blocks which I can use within ruby.
>
> As stated in another message:
>
> "
> possibly start to implement the remaining 30%.
>
> But possibly I should split my requirements down into smaller chunks,
> and ask step by step.
> "
>
>
> So, most possibly I have to go this way.
>
> Asking step by step.
This may sound like a stupid idea, but since it seems that these tools
you crave for already exist in some form (even if they are proprietary
and/or expensive), would it be too much trouble for you to name one
for each 'frame' in your 'stack'? For example: "I need a tool that can
create anything that I want (currently VaporStudio from Imagitasy can
do this)". This would help in giving you some concrete answers as it
could help explain what you want, exactly (your 'stack' is
ridiculously vague).
Secondly, and this may be just a language barrier issue, you come
across as either a troll or just hostile. Revising your tone (or
offering some other explanation) would probably help a lot.
E
Ilias Lazaridis
> What might also help ... you will be in a better position to ask good
[...] - (process suggestions)
Sorry, cannot alter my process.
> That being said, I would look at this differently if I were in your
> position. Rather than searching for a language that "does it all" (or
> 70%, as you said) I would look for a language that is capable enough
> to meet the requirements, but moreover, something that truly makes
> life as a developer more productive and less stressful, you know?
> That is the kind of language I would want to base a framework on -
> even if I had to develop it myself.
I understand what you mean.
But I have some timing constraints, thus depending on some existing
coverage.
> Of course, that really explains why I am a Ruby developer in the
> first place... I don't like having to wrestle with a language to make
> it behave :-)
>
> Cheers ... and good luck on your search.
Thank you very much.
> Tim
.
Ilias Lazaridis
>>Lähettäjä: Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com>
>>Aihe: Re: [EVALUATION] - E01: The Java Failure - May Ruby Helps?
>>
>>Austin Ziegler wrote:
>>[...] - (increased complexity, lost context)
>>
>>I'm sorry, I cannot continue the discussion.
>>
>>building-blocks which I can use within ruby.
>>
>>As stated in another message:
>>
>>"
>>If i find e.g. 70% fo my requirements fulfilled within ruby, I would
>>possibly start to implement the remaining 30%.
>>
>>But possibly I should split my requirements down into smaller chunks,
>>and ask step by step.
>>"
>>
>>-
>>
>>So, most possibly I have to go this way.
>>
>>Asking step by step.
>
> This may sound like a stupid idea, but since it seems that these tools
> you crave for already exist in some form (even if they are proprietary
> and/or expensive), would it be too much trouble for you to name one
> for each 'frame' in your 'stack'?
This is a very nice idea.
But I cannot name them.
> For example: "I need a tool that can
> create anything that I want (currently VaporStudio from Imagitasy can
> do this)". This would help in giving you some concrete answers as it
> could help explain what you want, exactly (your 'stack' is
> ridiculously vague).
I think the stack is very concise and precise.
Another thing is, if it is imlementable.
I will take the single-step-approach.
Will open a new thread with the first part shortly.
[If someone has answers to the full stack, they are of course welcome]
> Secondly, and this may be just a language barrier issue, you come
> across as either a troll or just hostile. Revising your tone (or
> offering some other explanation) would probably help a lot.
It's not a language barrier issue.
I can change my [sterile, fact-oriented] writing-style.
But I will not.
.
Joao Pedrosa
> > For example: "I need a tool that can
> > create anything that I want (currently VaporStudio from Imagitasy can
> > do this)". This would help in giving you some concrete answers as it
> > could help explain what you want, exactly (your 'stack' is
> > ridiculously vague).
>
> I think the stack is very concise and precise.
>
> Another thing is, if it is imlementable.
>
> I will take the single-step-approach.
>
> Will open a new thread with the first part shortly.
>
> [If someone has answers to the full stack, they are of course welcome]
Could you write some free MDA tool for Ruby? I think we are missing one. :-)
Cheers,
Joao
E S
> Aihe: Re: [EVALUATION] - E01: The Java Failure - May Ruby Helps?
>
> E S wrote:
> >>Lähettäjä: Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com>
> >>Aihe: Re: [EVALUATION] - E01: The Java Failure - May Ruby Helps?
> >>
> >>Austin Ziegler wrote:
> >>[...] - (increased complexity, lost context)
> >>
> >>I'm sorry, I cannot continue the discussion.
> >>
> >>I just ask the community to point at least to an clear overview of the
> >>building-blocks which I can use within ruby.
> >>
> >>As stated in another message:
> >>
> >>"
> >>If i find e.g. 70% fo my requirements fulfilled within ruby, I would
> >>possibly start to implement the remaining 30%.
> >>
> >>But possibly I should split my requirements down into smaller chunks,
> >>and ask step by step.
> >>"
> >>
> >>-
> >>
> >>So, most possibly I have to go this way.
> >>
> >>Asking step by step.
> >
> > This may sound like a stupid idea, but since it seems that these tools
> > you crave for already exist in some form (even if they are proprietary
> > and/or expensive), would it be too much trouble for you to name one
> > for each 'frame' in your 'stack'?
>
> This is a very nice idea.
>
> But I cannot name them.
The tools exist but you can't name them? J'accuse.
> > For example: "I need a tool that can
> > create anything that I want (currently VaporStudio from Imagitasy can
> > do this)". This would help in giving you some concrete answers as it
> > could help explain what you want, exactly (your 'stack' is
> > ridiculously vague).
>
> I think the stack is very concise and precise.
>
> Another thing is, if it is imlementable.
>
> I will take the single-step-approach.
>
> Will open a new thread with the first part shortly.
>
> [If someone has answers to the full stack, they are of course welcome]
>
> > Secondly, and this may be just a language barrier issue, you come
> > across as either a troll or just hostile. Revising your tone (or
> > offering some other explanation) would probably help a lot.
>
> It's not a language barrier issue.
>
> I can change my [sterile, fact-oriented] writing-style.
>
> But I will not.
Nice. I think you're done here.
E
Austin Ziegler
> Austin Ziegler wrote:
> >>Please avoid further off-topic replies.
> > Okay. I'm through.
> > If you're not going to go through and actually look at the *extensive*
> [...] - (off-context comments)
> Sorry, but I did not read your writings.
>
> You increase the complexity in a direction which is not of any relevance
> for me.
Wrong. I did not increase the complexity; I addressed your ignorance.
Maybe that is increasing the complexity. Read what I wrote. It has
everything you need to actually do some real work, rather than trying
to get others to do the work for you. Except maybe URLs, and since
you've demonstrated that you can use Google Groups, you can certainly
use Google to get the URLs needed.
The fact is that all of the replies have been on-topic and to the
point of your response. They just aren't what you want to hear. It's
called "do your own homework."
Ilias Lazaridis
I try to estimate the effort for implement something like an MDA tool.
What I try to find (or partly to implement) is something like this:
http://lazaridis.com/case/ide/index.html
-
But for this I need the cooperation of the community.
Especially for analysing which parts are already existent.
> Cheers,
> Joao
.
Ilias Lazaridis
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 06:24:52 +0900, Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
>
>>Austin Ziegler wrote:
>>
>>>>Please avoid further off-topic replies.
>>>
>>>Okay. I'm through.
>>>If you're not going to go through and actually look at the *extensive*
>>
>>[...] - (off-context comments)
>>Sorry, but I did not read your writings.
>>
>>You increase the complexity in a direction which is not of any relevance
>>for me.
>
> Wrong. I did not increase the complexity; I addressed your ignorance.
This is not of relevance at this stage.
Please have the gentleness to avoid further off-context comments.
I have a limited processing capacity, which I cannot exhaust with [at
least at this time] non-relevant constructs.
.
Stephen Kellett
<il...@lazaridis.com> writes
>[...] - (process suggestions)
>
>Sorry, cannot alter my process.
Translation: "I am driving in a straight line. A bend approaches. I will
drive off the road despite the advice to the contrary from the people I
have solicited advice from".
Stephen
--
Stephen Kellett
Object Media Limited http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk
RSI Information: http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk/rsi.html
Stephen Kellett
<il...@lazaridis.com> writes
>is it possible that i've invested all this time to do this research and
>to write everything down on my website, just for having some fun on
>some forums?
You aren't doing research. You are asking other people to do your
research for you. Which is why I, and others, in multiple newsgroups
will continue to implore you to do some work yourself. You've stated in
some posts that are not willing to even use a search engine. In the
Python newsgroup after about 5 days you asked the infamous "Who's
Guido?" question. A question that any that *had* done some research
about Python would never ask - they would know.
>I ask you friendly to avoid further off-topic posts.
I ask you to do some work yourself rather than expect others to do it
for you.
Stephen Kellett
<il...@lazaridis.com> writes
>> Yes, yes it is. You've got an awful lot of detailed information
>>from some very helpful and
>> patient people, so maybe it's time to actually try the language now?
>
>no, it not the time.
Wrong answer.
>Please avoid further off-topic replies.
His reply was on-topic. He answered a question you asked. Except you
thought it was a rhetorical question.
Luke Graham
Well done to him.
--
spooq
Dick Davies
> In message <cutlgv$30s$2...@usenet.otenet.gr>, Ilias Lazaridis
> <il...@lazaridis.com> writes
> >> Yes, yes it is. You've got an awful lot of detailed information
> >>from some very helpful and
> >>patient people, so maybe it's time to actually try the language now?
> >
> >no, it not the time.
>
> Wrong answer.
>
> >Please avoid further off-topic replies.
>
> His reply was on-topic. He answered a question you asked. Except you
> thought it was a rhetorical question.
I call troll, sorry for feeding.
--
'common sense is what tells you that the world is flat.'
-- Principia Discordia
zimb...@gmail.com
HOWTO be Ilias Lazaridis :
>"
>A cooperation between Sun Microsystems and IBM&Co. in conjunction with
>liberal & high evolutive communities would result in an nearly
>unbeatable programming platform.
>
>My evaluation has shown:
(affirmation with no backup)
What I want is to takeover the world, please think like me.
Also please take a look at my buzzword generated website.
>
>Thus I leave all those ridiculous folks behind,
(Java bashing)
Because I have a high sense of what a community IS, please only talk
about what I want to hear. Everything that answeres my questions will
be noted as irrelevant.
>-
>
>"
>Of course It's a sad day.
>
(censorship notes)
Censorship is ok for me to takeover the world
>http://lazaridis.com/core/project/open.html
>"
please first read http://goat.cx/
>-
>
>"I'm sure there is one community out there which will realize
immediatly
>the benefits of an high-evolutive system. "
>
>-
please define high-evolutive
[...]
>During the 6 months evaluation i've extracted several constructs.
>
>"How it should be to become high evolutive"
>
>-
please define high-evolutive
>I don't know Ruby.
>
>Basicly I would like to do everything in C++.
>
>But development must go quicker.
You could do like me, try to use the community to do the work for
yourself. Language selection is not a matter of taste and needs, but of
how much monkeys uses it.
[...]
Sorry I got tired at that point :p
Stephen Kellett
"zimb...@gmail.com" <zimb...@gmail.com> writes
>please first read http://goat.cx/
That is probably the most offensive (and painful) image I have seen in a
very long time. Yuck.
Alexander Kellett
at -1!!!
:P
Alex
Christian Neukirchen
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 05:24:52 +0900, Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
>> > You've got an awful lot of detailed information from some very helpful and
>> > patient people, so maybe it's time to actually try the language now?
>> no, it not the time.
>>
>> Please avoid further off-topic replies.
>
> Okay. I'm through.
>
[snip wonderful stuff]
> Until then, I'm done. You aren't providing specifics and you're being
> quite silly in your expectations. It's time for you to do some work
> for yourself.
Thank you, it had to be said.
> -austin
> --
> Austin Ziegler * halos...@gmail.com
> * Alternate: aus...@halostatue.ca
--
Christian Neukirchen <chneuk...@gmail.com> http://chneukirchen.org
Stephen Kellett
>at -1!!!
Slashdot - at times interesting, but the lack of insight in some of the
article postings, and especially in the comments in amazing. The signal
to noise is so low its not worth reading the comments much, if at all.
That said, I do read it every day as there may be a good article or 2 to
follow. Even if the "insightful" comment isn't up to much, often the
original article or company mentioned is interesting (The AlphaGrip was
good, plus an email to them got a quick and informative reply from one
of the creators).
Stephen
James Britt
>> omg! blasphemy! a ruby user thats never wasted hours reading slashdot
>> at -1!!!
>
>
> Slashdot - at times interesting, but the lack of insight in some of the
> article postings, and especially in the comments in amazing. The signal
> to noise is so low its not worth reading the comments much, if at all.
Handy though to read comments a +3 or higher just to see the (possibly)
goos stuff.
>
> That said, I do read it every day as there may be a good article or 2 to
> follow. Even if the "insightful" comment isn't up to much, often the
> original article or company mentioned is interesting (The AlphaGrip was
> good, plus an email to them got a quick and informative reply from one
> of the creators).
I seem to get mod points every other week, so I go looking for positive
mentions of Ruby to mod up.
James
Markus Pilzecker
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Austin Ziegler wrote:
| On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 04:34:53 +0900, Ilias Lazaridis
| <il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
|
...
|
| Actually, Ilias, it is 100% accurate. There is no system in
| existence -- no CASE tool in existence -- which will allow you to:
Would you subsume an MDA-based model transformer and generator
framework under your understanding of ``CASE tool''?
| 1) generate any random application in the world that can use an
| embedded database or an external database and perform well in any
| use case; and
I think, this is a point, where a generator indeed helps. It helps a
lot to keep domain knowledge in the model [of the domain -- you see,
it's about to become a tautology] and to concentrate the diverse
aspects of technology projections into the transformation engine.
| 2) program against platform-agnostic GUI to run on systems from Sun
| to Linux to Windows to MacOS X to PalmOS or even something
| embedded in your toaster, OR run as a web application at whim.
|
| That's basically what you're wanting. There's no such commercial
| application and there's no such open source application. Why?
Only, if you exclude transformer|generator frameworks from the
understanding of CASE tool.
| Because such a tool would SUCK. As every single CASE tool in
| existence has ever done. CASE tools generally require that you run a
| very large runtime, program *their* way, often in *their* language
| (which isn't related to anyone else's), and then tend to fall behind
| both operating system releases and the technology curve.
|
Transformer|generator frameworks concentrate the knowledge of the
target technology in the transformation engine. At least for simpler
scenarios, this does not at all imply generation or use of a runtime
system: e.g., if you have modelled your system in ArcStyler and use
its Java2-cartridge to generate code of it, there is nothing near to
a runtime system, which comes into the game. And the result is [at
least beyond javac] as slim as what you could code by hand.
Of course, if one utilises external libraries[, which is usually the
case], your domain model has a surface against a model of these
libraries, or an abstraction thereof. And then, you will link your
application against a runtime lib, when it comes to build it.
If, at some time in the future, javadoc is replaced by the model of
the world, represented by the lib, your transformer|generator were able
to _generate_ exactly this part of the lib, which is needed together
with your application. You can regard this as on-the-fly generation of
the runtime system. Seen from this perspective, a lib of nowadays is
nothing else than a cache of the generated products. Consider e.g. a
state machine like it is used in lex or a table-based L2-engine as in
some LALR-parser: why shouldn't you want to ``cache'' it in a library?
A clear advantage of a generator is, that you can easily customise the
generated products. And [e.g. with ArcStyler] it is already possible,
to use one and the same model and generate Java code from it or C# code
[or both] and the artefacts, you need to build, and, if you like, deploy
it to an application server.
Present experience shows, that all structural decisions[, e.g., which
patterns you apply, what a deployment descriptor is or the syntax of a
make file, ...] get materialised in the transformation engine and
can be kept separate from the domain world to quite a high degree.
Just to say it a bit more explicit: programming diverts into two
activities: programming the transformer and programming the domain
dynamics.
Certainly, you have the freedom to be unclever and interrelate model
and transformer tightly. But this is less the fault of a methodology,
but an inherent property of any knowledge engineering process: you
have the freedom to be dumb. The question is: does it help you to be
un-dumb?
So much,
~ Markus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCE3uP0sM4x4ItYcQRAntfAJ9lwO/yi1JAcVxcr+AhdfScvMheOwCfcKJy
JrfvPMnG7XJJtWAFmhw83j0=
=ryQ0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Markus Pilzecker
Hash: SHA1
Markus Pilzecker wrote:
|
| Austin Ziegler wrote:
| | On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 04:34:53 +0900, Ilias Lazaridis
| | <il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
| |
| ...
| |
| | Actually, Ilias, it is 100% accurate. There is no system in
| | existence -- no CASE tool in existence -- which will allow you to:
|
...
| Just to say it a bit more explicit: programming diverts into two
| activities: programming the transformer and programming the domain
| dynamics.
|
Oh yes, one thing left: you invest into a transformer. At least yet,
before transformers are standardised by something like QVT, ..., you
invest in proprietary transformer technology. But this was the same
story for UI projection tools, like the old XVT, which made you
independent from the windowing system: it made you dependent on the
vendor of the projector. But this is the price for riding the
bleeding edge: it is ahead of standardisation.
For now,
~ Markus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCE3+00sM4x4ItYcQRAsHQAJ9CaY0l/8011IKZADrnyBWf8s22CwCfSr42
cug8sLY6bj4HdRfTlqGvFAs=
=qfUw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Christian Neukirchen
> In message <1108556050....@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "zimb...@gmail.com" <zimb...@gmail.com> writes
>>please first read http://goat.cx/
>
> That is probably the most offensive (and painful) image I have seen in
> a very long time. Yuck.
Just curious, how long have you been on the net?
Glenn Parker
>
> Slashdot - at times interesting, but the lack of insight in some of the
> article postings, and especially in the comments in amazing. The signal
> to noise is so low its not worth reading the comments much, if at all.
Pre-filtered SlashDot with S/N graphs: http://alterslash.org/
The way ruby-talk traffic keeps growing, we may need something similar.
:)
--
Glenn Parker | glenn.parker-AT-comcast.net | <http://www.tetrafoil.com/>
Austin Ziegler
<markus.p...@io-software.com> wrote:
> Austin Ziegler wrote:
> | Actually, Ilias, it is 100% accurate. There is no system in
> | existence -- no CASE tool in existence -- which will allow you
> | to:
> Would you subsume an MDA-based model transformer and generator
> framework under your understanding of ``CASE tool''?
A "generic" model transformer and generator, yes. A framework,
maybe. It depends on the capabilities. However, properly stated,
code generation is a toolbox, not a tool.
> | 1) generate any random application in the world that can use an
> | embedded database or an external database and perform well in
> | any use case; and
> I think, this is a point, where a generator indeed helps. It helps
> a lot to keep domain knowledge in the model [of the domain -- you
> see, it's about to become a tautology] and to concentrate the
> diverse aspects of technology projections into the transformation
> engine.
Yes, but a generator isn't necessarily the same as what was being
talked about. All of the generators that I've ever used have been
domain and application specific. Additionally, proper generation
techniques indicate that you should know how to implement at least
one of the items you're generating (e.g., if you're developing a
generated GUI, you should develop at least one screen by hand; the
same applies to web interfaces, etc.)
> | 2) program against platform-agnostic GUI to run on systems from Sun
> | to Linux to Windows to MacOS X to PalmOS or even something
> | embedded in your toaster, OR run as a web application at whim.
> |
> | That's basically what you're wanting. There's no such commercial
> | application and there's no such open source application. Why?
> Only, if you exclude transformer|generator frameworks from the
> understanding of CASE tool.
Not at all. Code generation is a technique -- a toolbox -- and not a
silver bullet. It's a very valuable technique, and various tools can
help with the technique, but there's still *no such (singular) tool*
to generate an application and make it run everywhere in every way
that makes it feel right for those platforms. It's a non-soluble
problem, especially when you get to user interaction and platform
look-and-feel.
To take a simple example, there's a development tool for mobile
development called "AppForge". This plugs into a Visual Basic
development environment and allows you to generate mobile apps for
the PocketPC, PalmOS, Symbian, Windows Mobile, Windows SmartPhone,
and a few other targets, I think. The application thus generated
requires a massive runtime (300Kb on PalmOS systems) and doesn't
look like native applications. Similarly, Java's Swing doesn't look
or act like any other application on a platform.
If a developer for the platforms in question can't do it, what makes
you think that a transformer/generator will be able to do it?
>| Because such a tool would SUCK. As every single CASE tool in
>| existence has ever done. CASE tools generally require that you
>| run a very large runtime, program *their* way, often in *their*
>| language (which isn't related to anyone else's), and then tend to
>| fall behind both operating system releases and the technology
>| curve.
> Transformer|generator frameworks concentrate the knowledge of the
> target technology in the transformation engine. At least for
> simpler scenarios, this does not at all imply generation or use of
> a runtime system: e.g., if you have modelled your system in
> ArcStyler and use its Java2-cartridge to generate code of it,
> there is nothing near to a runtime system, which comes into the
> game. And the result is [at least beyond javac] as slim as what
> you could code by hand.
Maybe. I'm very skeptical of claims in this direction. Indeed, what
the OP wanted was something that could be run on an embedded device,
a workstation, or a cluster of servers. I'm sorry, but I stand by my
original statement: there's no such tool -- not even ArcStyler --
which can do that. (And I'm unsurprised that UML is being pushed
this way. UML is good for very few things, and the most important
part of making an n-tier database applications is one of the things
that UML is worst at: data modeling. It's too based on OO
technologies to even remotely come close to properly modeling data
relationships other than hierarchical.)
[major snippage]
> Present experience shows, that all structural decisions[, e.g., which
> patterns you apply, what a deployment descriptor is or the syntax of a
> make file, ...] get materialised in the transformation engine and
> can be kept separate from the domain world to quite a high degree.
> Just to say it a bit more explicit: programming diverts into two
> activities: programming the transformer and programming the domain
> dynamics.
Again, maybe. ArcStyler and other OMG-driven insanities won't help.
Being able to state requirements clearly will.
Stephen Kellett
Since July 1990. Why?
Stephen
Stephen Kellett
<jamesUN...@neurogami.com> writes
>I seem to get mod points every other week, so I go looking for positive
>mentions of Ruby to mod up.
:-) I'm an anon coward because I can't be bothered logging in.
Martin DeMello
> >Just curious, how long have you been on the net?
>
> Since July 1990. Why?
That picture is a sort of bizarre rite of passage :) It even has its own
Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goatse.cx
It's very popular with the slashdot troll crowd, which is why so many
people were asking about your slashdot reading habits.
martin
Stephen Kellett
<martin...@yahoo.com> writes
>> Since July 1990. Why?
>
>That picture is a sort of bizarre rite of passage :) It even has its own
>Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goatse.cx
You learn something new every day...
I've got to admit I'm surprised that the sys admin at my previous place
of work didn't show me this image - as far as weird images go, this one
fits his sick sense of humour. I was always amazed at the things he'd be
viewing even though his screen was clearly visible from the CEO's
office.
Christian Neukirchen
>>Just curious, how long have you been on the net?
>
> Since July 1990. Why?
15 years on the net and no goatse. wow. :-)
Good night,
Stephen Kellett
<chneuk...@gmail.com> writes
>> Since July 1990. Why?
>
>15 years on the net and no goatse. wow. :-)
Indeed.
>BTW, http://www.tubgirl.com
Thats an amazing image. I'm quite impressed by the height of the plume.
Also totally bizarre that her beaver has been digitally obscured when
you consider what the photo is of.
Kaspar Schiess
[entiry post snipped]
Hello Ilias,
I would like to tell you that we have uncovered your real identity. You are
generated by a bunch of sociologists that are into male dominant behaviour
research.
Or you are just a Turing Test gone very very wrong.
Please do me the favor of answering: My post was trying to cut right trough
the sterility. Please, show some emotion here.
Whatever it is, happy trolling !
kaspar
code manufacture - ruby lab
www.tua.ch/ruby
Mark Hubbart
> (In response to news:ctsjso$7v6$1...@usenet.otenet.gr by Ilias Lazaridis)
>
> [entiry post snipped]
>
> Hello Ilias,
>
> I would like to tell you that we have uncovered your real identity. You are
> generated by a bunch of sociologists that are into male dominant behaviour
> research.
>
> Or you are just a Turing Test gone very very wrong.
>
> Please do me the favor of answering: My post was trying to cut right trough
> the sterility. Please, show some emotion here.
Strangely, I had already been reminded of a story where a distributed
AI spread over the net as a worm; It then started impersonating people
on the net.
So it really made me look twice when he mentioned his "limited processing time".
cheers,
Mark
Markus Pilzecker
Hash: SHA1
Austin Ziegler wrote:
| On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 02:04:51 +0900, Markus Pilzecker
| <markus.p...@io-software.com> wrote:
|
|>Austin Ziegler wrote:
|>| Actually, Ilias, it is 100% accurate. There is no system in
...
|
| A "generic" model transformer and generator, yes. A framework,
| maybe. It depends on the capabilities. However, properly stated,
| code generation is a toolbox, not a tool.
|
Agreed. It only makes sense, if the transformer|generator framework
is to such an extreme degree customisable, that you can call this
programming.
...
|
| Yes, but a generator isn't necessarily the same as what was being
| talked about. All of the generators that I've ever used have been
| domain and application specific.
At least those modern ones like AndroMDA or ArcStyler are quite
independent of the practical domain. They are of course to some
extent specific to the target technology -- but only in one aspect:
you get delivered object technology for the transformer|generator
framework plus some ``library'' transformers, you can start with.
These latter are partially quite generic like an EJB generator, you
can derive your own specific, lets say Jonas-, generator from.
Partially, you get e.g. a concrete product-specific WLS8 generator.
And for this, of course, it's quite right to speak of specificity
wrt. the target technology.
| Additionally, proper generation
| techniques indicate that you should know how to implement at least
| one of the items you're generating (e.g., if you're developing a
| generated GUI, you should develop at least one screen by hand; the
| same applies to web interfaces, etc.)
|
Well, frankly, I'm not such an expert in EJB-technology, but I'm able
to set up my own hello-world application with a handful of classes
with a running Weblogic Server in a day or so. I do not even have
to have seen the interior of a deployment descriptor[, as long as
things work about as expected ;-) ]. Of course, if it comes to
debugging, while trying to understand, what's going wrong, I
certainly don't get around digging deeper into EJB-technology.
...
|
| Not at all. Code generation is a technique -- a toolbox -- and not a
| silver bullet. It's a very valuable technique, and various tools can
| help with the technique, but there's still *no such (singular) tool*
| to generate an application and make it run everywhere in every way
| that makes it feel right for those platforms. It's a non-soluble
| problem, especially when you get to user interaction and platform
| look-and-feel.
|
Of course, at least one person [or company or whatever] has to perform
this technology [+user interaction, ...] -projection at least once.
It's as at least one person has to write the gcc-backend for the
(n+1)st CPU-type.
| To take a simple example, there's a development tool for mobile
| development called "AppForge". This plugs into a Visual Basic
| development environment and allows you to generate mobile apps for
| the PocketPC, PalmOS, Symbian, Windows Mobile, Windows SmartPhone,
| and a few other targets, I think. The application thus generated
| requires a massive runtime (300Kb on PalmOS systems)
Then, the generator does not [completely] map to the target platform.
The problem probably is, that it is more expensive to implement a
reasonably complete technology projection into a generator than to
implement an emulation layer.
| and doesn't
| look like native applications. Similarly, Java's Swing doesn't look
| or act like any other application on a platform.
|
This is a phenomenon inherent to a portability scenario. Would you
want to overcome this, had you to invest much into flavor-mapping.
Most of the time, it is decided, that it's not worth it.
And you cannot even say, that it is bad, if it does not look as
PalmOS. Me, not knowing PalmOS, may make it feel at home, when I
find something looking like Swing.
| If a developer for the platforms in question can't do it, what makes
| you think that a transformer/generator will be able to do it?
|
I don't think that. A generator will not produce better code than
a good informatician. But since it has the ability to gather some
structural knowledge, it can produce much more code of about the same
quality as that of a good informatician. In the long run, a generator
may gather optimisation knowledge, like peep-hole optimisation, loop
unroling, design patterns, ..., which a programmer can not apply
alltogether in a short enough time.
|
|>| Because such a tool would SUCK. As every single CASE tool in
|>| existence has ever done. CASE tools generally require that you
|>| run a very large runtime, program *their* way, often in *their*
|>| language (which isn't related to anyone else's), and then tend to
|>| fall behind both operating system releases and the technology
|>| curve.
|>Transformer|generator frameworks concentrate the knowledge of the
|>target technology in the transformation engine. At least for
|>simpler scenarios, this does not at all imply generation or use of
|>a runtime system: e.g., if you have modelled your system in
|>ArcStyler and use its Java2-cartridge to generate code of it,
|>there is nothing near to a runtime system, which comes into the
|>game. And the result is [at least beyond javac] as slim as what
|>you could code by hand.
|
|
| Maybe. I'm very skeptical of claims in this direction. Indeed, what
| the OP wanted was something that could be run on an embedded device,
| a workstation, or a cluster of servers. I'm sorry, but I stand by my
| original statement: there's no such tool -- not even ArcStyler --
| which can do that.
Of course, not out of the box. Because this required, that the
transformer|generator knew all _your_ requirements, constraints and
trade-offs in advance. But a good transformer framework can make it
acceptably easy to articulate these specifities.
| (And I'm unsurprised that UML is being pushed
| this way. UML is good for very few things, and the most important
| part of making an n-tier database applications is one of the things
| that UML is worst at: data modeling.
I'm not sure, if it is that bad: define the datatypes of your database
and store that in a profile. Every table is a class with attributes
/*the columns*/ of one the available types. May be, I oversimplified
a bit -- but did I too much?
The other question is, if it _should_ be good at that. At least the
a-priori assumption was[ according to some human judgement of a certain
community], that OO is superior to ER. And if you have legacy RDBMSs,
you have specify some OR-mapping -- most probably somewhere in your
transformer model. If you don't have that legacy, you could have that
mapping undercover -- or you use an object database anyway. In these
latter cases, you won't have to model any ER part.
| It's too based on OO
| technologies to even remotely come close to properly modeling data
| relationships other than hierarchical.)
|
Where is the restriction to hierarchies? I think, I'm able to draw
general graphs...
| [major snippage]
|
|
| Again, maybe. ArcStyler and other OMG-driven insanities won't help.
If you criticised, that abstraction requirements on those, who have
to program the transformers, misses market availability, you may have
got me to agree. And of course, commitee compromises tend to be far
from satisfying. But using transformers to convert graphs, be it
on MOF-level-1 or on MOF-level-0[, which is the usual case in ``normal
programming'',] or between level 1 and level 0 [or between 2 an 1]
is a paradigm, I won't easily give up.
| Being able to state requirements clearly will.
|
Ack.
A+, Markus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCFKX90sM4x4ItYcQRAmH7AJ9o/yZQ4hST16qJvwRwqfkEup0uXACfUWle
nEZ3yXqJ6GWyVIBmi9W95eU=
=VTmZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Curt
>
> I have a limited processing capacity, which I cannot exhaust with [at
> least at this time] non-relevant constructs.
Have you considered upgrading?
Stephen Kellett
<cu...@free.fr> writes
Careful, his 16Kb RAM pack might wobble!
[I wonder how many of you know what that is a reference to?]
Steve Longdo
Austin Ziegler
<markus.p...@io-software.com> wrote:
[snip]
>| Yes, but a generator isn't necessarily the same as what was being
>| talked about. All of the generators that I've ever used have been
>| domain and application specific.
> At least those modern ones like AndroMDA or ArcStyler are quite
> independent of the practical domain. They are of course to some
> extent specific to the target technology -- but only in one
> generator] framework plus some ``library'' transformers, you can
> start with. These latter are partially quite generic like an EJB
> generator, you can derive your own specific, lets say Jonas-,
> generator from. Partially, you get e.g. a concrete
> product-specific WLS8 generator. And for this, of course, it's
> quite right to speak of specificity wrt. the target technology.
I'm still highly skeptical. I don't doubt the value and efficiency
benefit from code generation: I was one of the many technical
reviewers on Jack Herrington's _Code Generation in Action_ and it's
an amazingly useful book. But I've seen entirely too many situations
where UML has been abused and misused.
That said, I also think that most modern frameworks are far larger
than they need to be, and I think that Rails, Nitro, Wee, and IOWA
are excellent examples of what can be done if you have a highly
expressive language and don't have to write ten thousand helper
classes. I also don't think that UML simplifies matters in the
least.
ArcStyler looks impressive -- and it will be a tool that I
investigate should I ever need to work in one of these crazy
environments again. But I'll probably lean more toward the CGiA
approach rather than another expensive tool that makes it difficult
to migrate from.
[big snip]
> | (And I'm unsurprised that UML is being pushed this way. UML is
> | good for very few things, and the most important part of making
> | an n-tier database applications is one of the things that UML is
> | worst at: data modeling.
>
> I'm not sure, if it is that bad: define the datatypes of your
> database and store that in a profile. Every table is a class with
> attributes /*the columns*/ of one the available types. May be, I
> oversimplified a bit -- but did I too much?
Yes, actually. The language behind UML lends itself well to class
definition, but not so well to relation definition. In my logical
model, I might have:
+-+0..* 0..*+-+
|L|----------|R|
+-+ +-+
Where L and R represent tables that have many-to-many relations with
each other. In practice, this is almost always implemented
relationally as:
+-+0..* 0..*+-+0..* 0..*+-+
|L|----------|M|----------|R|
+-+ +-+ +-+
Where M is that many-to-many relation table. There's no way that
would ever be represented that way in UML. In all likelihood, the
class L would contain a set of Rs. This sets up a one-way-browse
situation. To bring it a bit more concrete, if L is a customer and R
is a rate package, then many customers may have a single rate
package and some customers may have multiple rate packages. The
proper relationship in an OO hierarchy in this case is that an L
owns zero or more Rs. Without setting up a cyclical hierarchy or
scanning the set of Ls for all their Rs, you have no way of knowing
which Rs are used by what Ls. In a relational database, this is
easy -- and the modeling as such is very different.
> The other question is, if it _should_ be good at that. At least
> the a-priori assumption was[ according to some human judgement of
> a certain community], that OO is superior to ER. And if you have
> legacy RDBMSs, you have specify some OR-mapping -- most probably
> somewhere in your transformer model. If you don't have that
> legacy, you could have that mapping undercover -- or you use an
> object database anyway. In these latter cases, you won't have to
> model any ER part.
Well, the problem is that object databases are simply a repeat of
hierarchical databases. The object graphs are typically one way, not
two way. Relational databases describe relationships and are and
always will be superior to object databases, despite the impedance
mismatch that most people have when converting from the open-ended
relationship description in relational databases and the closed-
ended relationship description in most OO languages.
So yes, the a priori assumption was that OO is superior to ER, but
that assumption is unequivocally wrong. OO makes the mistake of
putting the data on equal footing as the application. Considering
that a lot of people developed applications without concern for the
data, this was an important step forward in theoretical circles. In
practice, businesses *always* consider their data more valuable than
their programs. OO turns this on its head by tying the data so
tightly to the program that the data becomes difficult to use in any
other way.
Yes, I'm biased. I saw a company that I worked for spend many
millions of dollars on implementing a system that was designed by
hotshot college graduates who had been filled with the worst sort of
OO design garbage and had absolutely no data modeling skills to
understand their data separately from their object model. The system
took thirty seconds to simply authenticate users -- and they
couldn't get it under seven seconds. The version of the system that
I worked on was much more realistically developed and had a good,
strong data model that drove the object design. Ultimately, the
expensive project that was heavy on UML and related technologies was
killed and many of the developers were integrated into the team that
I worked on.
The OMG isn't a disinterested observer here. Neither, ultimately,
are you, as you work for the makers of ArcStyler. But UML holds very
hollow promises for anything smaller than an enterprise billing
system -- and its promises there aren't much better, because it adds
a lot of overhead. Data modeling is the single most important skill
that any developer can learn; if you can learn to model your data,
you can learn to make good objects than have better reuse
characteristics.
>| It's too based on OO technologies to even remotely come close to
>| properly modeling data relationships other than hierarchical.)
> Where is the restriction to hierarchies? I think, I'm able to draw
> general graphs...
You can, sort of. But for a variety of reasons, you're not going to,
and UML actively discourages it. See my discussion above on the one-
way-browsing problem.
Bill Guindon
/who greenlighted this thread?
//It's not Ruby, it's Fark!
///yes, slashing can be addictive.
--
Bill Guindon (aka aGorilla)
Ilias Lazaridis
It's always fascinating to see how a few people can completely ruin the
image of a community.
Really diaspointing.
.
Christian Neukirchen
> In message <m2k6p85...@lilith.local>, Christian Neukirchen
> <chneuk...@gmail.com> writes
>>> Since July 1990. Why?
>>
>>15 years on the net and no goatse. wow. :-)
>
> Indeed.
>
>>BTW, http://www.tubgirl.com
>
> Thats an amazing image. I'm quite impressed by the height of the plume.
>
> Also totally bizarre that her beaver has been digitally obscured when
> you consider what the photo is of.
That's probably needed to make the picture un-pornographic, but I
don't really want to get deeper into that (no pun intented).
> Stephen
> --
> Stephen Kellett
> Object Media Limited http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk
> RSI Information: http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk/rsi.html
Ilias Lazaridis
> Ilias Lazaridis <il...@lazaridis.com> wrote:
>
>>Simply stated:
>>
>>how can I create objects.
>>how can I make them persistent.
>>how can I create a generic GUI
>>how can I create a generic Web GUI
>>how can I update the object model
>>...
>
> If what you're looking for is a full stack web framework, check Rails
> out
ok
> - it does a really good job of designing the various parts to
> interact well with each other from the outset. It let me throw together
> a trivial CRUD app in a week,
This is too much.
It should not take more than 1 hour.
> two days of which were spent on Apche issues.
ok, I understand.
> I've not used Nitro or Wee, but I've heard good things about
> both of those too.
ok
> Non-web GUIs - http://www.rubygarden.org/ruby?ComparingGuiToolkits
ok
> As for objects, it's nigh impossible to use Ruby *without* creating
> them :)
ok
> Surfing the Rubygarden wiki and the newsgroup archives should garner you
> a lot more.
ok
> martin
Thank you for your gentle answers.
.
Ben Giddings
> I'm closing this thread.
No, you're not. It will live on forever.
> It's always fascinating to see how a few people can completely ruin the
> image of a community.
>
> Really diaspointing.
Actually, I think this will go on to prove how incredibly friendly and
helpful the Ruby community is. Despite the fact you're an obvious
troll, and have been banned from a number of other groups, despite your
insulting posts, despite your valiant attempts to start flame wars...
there were a lot of people who were friendly, and helpful, and nice to you.
I, for one, am amazed and proud that in a discussion of this size,
virtually nobody lost their cool, and only one goatse.cs picture was
posted -- and even the follow-ups to that were friendly and fun.
Congrats ruby-talk, I'd say you won this one.
Ben
Stephen Kellett
<steve....@gmail.com> writes
>Would that be a Sinclair ZX-81 reference?
Well done. Take a bow. I didn't think there were that many of us
slightly older folks around.
Or for US/Canadian folks, a Timex something or other.
Ilias Lazaridis
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>
>> I'm closing this thread.
>
> No, you're not.
You're right.
I've just reopened it, to answer you.
> It will live on forever.
until all usenet archives go down.
>> It's always fascinating to see how a few people can completely ruin
>> the image of a community.
>>
>> Really diaspointing.
>
> Actually, I think this will go on to prove how incredibly friendly and
> helpful the Ruby community is.
"incredibly friendly"
"helpful"
> Despite the fact you're an obvious
> troll, and have been banned from a number of other groups, despite your
> insulting posts, despite your valiant attempts to start flame wars...
"insulting posts"
"valiant attempts to start flame wars"
> there were a lot of people who were friendly, and helpful, and nice to you.
"friendly"
"helpful"
"nice"
> I, for one, am amazedand proud that in a discussion of this size,
> virtually nobody lost their cool, and only one goatse.cs picture was
> posted -- and even the follow-ups to that were friendly and fun.
"virtually nobody lost their cool"
> Congrats ruby-talk, I'd say you won this one.
And this is the most sad part of all this.
That you (and possibly most others) believe that all this is true [and
even if true, an achievement].
-
I'm wondering If anyone fo the posters has the courage to see what
essentially happened here.
And if anyone has the gentleness to apologize.
Possibly after reviewing this thread again after a few days.
> Ben
.
Stephan Kämper
> In message <cc4e85f305021...@mail.gmail.com>, Steve Longdo
> <steve....@gmail.com> writes
>
>> Would that be a Sinclair ZX-81 reference?
>
>
> Well done. Take a bow. I didn't think there were that many of us
> slightly older folks around.
>
> Or for US/Canadian folks, a Timex something or other.
>
> Stephen
I can remember pretty well sitting (closely) in front of a TV set with a
friend of mine - one browsing Rodney Zaks' 'Programming the Z-80' the
other typing hex code into REM lines. Was that pair programming already? ;-)
Ahhh, those were the days...
...which I don't really miss that much now that I have Ruby. :-)
Happy rubying
Stephan
Stephen Kellett
<il...@lazaridis.com> writes
>I'm wondering If anyone fo the posters has the courage to see what
>essentially happened here.
The only person that should apologize to any of the newsgroups you've
been in is yourself. That amount of times you were given on-topic
answers that you just shrug off with "I have not read it, it is off
topic". Arrogance and selfishness beyond belief.
Stephen Kellett
<Stephan...@Schleswig-Holstein.de> writes
>I can remember pretty well sitting (closely) in front of a TV set with
>a friend of mine - one browsing Rodney Zaks' 'Programming the Z-80'
>the other typing hex code into REM lines. Was that pair programming
>already? ;-)
>Ahhh, those were the days...
Yeah I remember a friend had just the ZX81, no ram pack. We played
Defender in 1K! Awesome - well not really, but...
I had a VIC-20, so had Rodney Zak's 6502 book - still have it.
Luke Graham
described itself as "fictive", got replies to his inane questions (even from
me :), prompted interesting discussions about other topics, got goatse
AND tubgirl to be posted, claimed to be "closing the thread", which got
MORE responses, and now hes drawing people into further discussion,
even asking for apologies in a puppy-dog manner. This troll has
incorporated all the advanced trolling features refined over the years in
the cradles of usenet and slashdot. I take my hat off to you, Sir Troll.
I wait with baited breath to find out where you take us next. Its a shame
that cross-posting isnt as effective with mailing lists as it is with usenet,
you could have tried to get this list arguing with another, as some of
your legendary forebears have done.
--
spooq
Mathieu Bouchard
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Kaspar Schiess wrote:
> I would like to tell you that we have uncovered your real identity.
> You are generated by a bunch of sociologists that are into male
> dominant behaviour research.
I think it's more along the lines of testing how long it takes for very
benevolent people to snap at thoroughly frustrating blackhole/vampire
people. The problem with testing that in the wild, is that it does have a
chilling effect on *real* benevolent people.
> Or you are just a Turing Test gone very very wrong.
I'd say it's more like an acute manic episode: delusions of grandeur,
superiority, and entitlement. But I Am Not A Psychiatrist.
> Please do me the favor of answering: My post was trying to cut right trough
> the sterility. Please, show some emotion here.
I don't think showing emotion is the key here. Showing some ability to
reason is the key (this is an intellectual forum), although the handling
of emotions has a very damn large impact on the ability to reason and/or
communicate, and so is indirectly key... Anyway I think emotion showed
through his posts and not in a nice way...
That's all said assuming he's not faking, although faking is likely too.
> Whatever it is, happy trolling !
happy cynicism !
PS: I have a better web curiousity for you all, more relevant and not
obscene: http://timecube.com/
_____________________________________________________________________
Mathieu Bouchard -=- Montréal QC Canada -=- http://artengine.ca/matju
Christian Neukirchen
> This is truly a superior troll. He started well, with a web-site that even
> described itself as "fictive", got replies to his inane questions (even from
> me :), prompted interesting discussions about other topics, got goatse
> AND tubgirl to be posted, claimed to be "closing the thread", which got
> MORE responses, and now hes drawing people into further discussion,
> even asking for apologies in a puppy-dog manner. This troll has
> incorporated all the advanced trolling features refined over the years in
> the cradles of usenet and slashdot. I take my hat off to you, Sir Troll.
> I wait with baited breath to find out where you take us next. Its a shame
> that cross-posting isnt as effective with mailing lists as it is with usenet,
> you could have tried to get this list arguing with another, as some of
> your legendary forebears have done.
Don't forget that he made you write a 12-line summary about him. :-)
Now, please let this thread die.
Ilias Lazaridis
> (In response to news:ctsjso$7v6$1...@usenet.otenet.gr by Ilias Lazaridis)
>
> [entiry post snipped]
>
> Hello Ilias,
>
> I would like to tell you that we have uncovered your real identity. You are
> generated by a bunch of sociologists that are into male dominant behaviour
> research.
My main goals are those which i've announce.
The "male dominant behaviour" [or: male inability to control egoism] is
a very intresting and essential topic within IT.
It has a deep impact on system-evolution-speed.
> Or you are just a Turing Test gone very very wrong.
I don't like "Turing Tests":
LISP - 2 exponent 0 = 1
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/msg/2244ab754a79d242
> Please do me the favor of answering: My post was trying to cut right trough
> the sterility. Please, show some emotion here.
Sorry, I prefere females.
> Whatever it is, happy trolling !
Thank's a lot.
> kaspar
>
> code manufacture - ruby lab
> www.tua.ch/ruby
.