On 14/06/2011, at 1:17 AM, Alan Kay wrote:
> It would be great if everyone on this list would think deeply about how to
> have an "eternal" system, and only be amplified by it.
Hi Alan,
You might need to elucidate a little more on this for me to personally
understand you. Not sure how others feel, but the "Worlds" work seems to be
just a description of a versioning pattern applied to running program state.
Why is it especially interesting? In the Ruby community, we have "gem" which is
a package manager and also bundler, the two of which handle dependency
management and sets of bundles of dependencies in context and situ elegantly
and beautifully. Depending on your requirements when writing code, you can
point to "a" version of a gem, the latest version, or say things like "versions
greater than 2.3". It works really well. It also fits very neatly with your
idea of (Alexander's? ;-)) the arch and biological cellular structure being a
scalable system: this system is working in practice extremely well. (Mind you,
there's a global namespace, so it will eventually get crowded I'm sure ;-))
What do you mean by an eternal system? Do you mean a system which lasts
forever? and what do you mean by amplified? Do you mean amplified as in our
energy around this topic, or something else?
Sorry for not understanding you straight away,
Regards,
Julian.
_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
fonc@vpri.org
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
