On 5/28/06, Yen-Ju Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am not sure I understand what you mean. I haven't look at the STActor, which is something new. But the use of -interpretScript:inContext:, which also exists in older version of StepTalk, allow language bundle to do whatever it can. So if this language bundle provides a binding to GNUstep, then StepTalk can do it.
Sure, but what I'm saying is that StepTalk only executes _scripts_ and does not act like a bridge, aware of the objects. STActor simulates an object by storing a script for each method and then calling the language bundle to execute each script when the method is called. That works fine (I used a similar mechanism when I wrote my steptalk palette), but it's not extremely fast. And you loose any specific oo capacities that the language itself provides. You need more than just scripts if you want to really program applications with another language and have reasonable performances -- you need a bridge. Basically that's all I'm saying :-) -- and that perhaps we could extend Steptalk to deal with objects rather than scripts (if it's not already the case, but afaik it's not). E.g. instead of -interpretScript:InContext: you'd have also -message:sentToObject: That way the objects can be managed completely by the language, and StepTalk will just act as a bridge. -- Nicolas Roard "I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." -- Douglas Adams _______________________________________________ Etoile-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-dev
