Mailing-List: contact dev-help@avalon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Avalon Developers List" <dev@avalon.apache.org>
To: dev@avalon.apache.org
From: Leo Simons <leosimons@apache.org>
Subject: Re: Multithreaded Message from the Devil ;P
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:29:54 +0200
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <bm49f2$ila$1@sea.gmane.org>
References: <3F857A03.30009@apache.org> <bm45g4$7e3$1@sea.gmane.org>
 <3F85A578.4000900@apache.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
 rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624
In-Reply-To: <3F85A578.4000900@apache.org>
Sender: news <news@sea.gmane.org>

Berin Loritsch wrote:
>> Anyway, fortress is /very/ close to being very usable as a nanokernel. 
>> To make that happen, all that we need to do is transfer more of the 
>> responsibilities to the component factories. Pico is a nice example of 
>> how well this works: more and more responsibility transferred into the 
>> component adapters / component adapter factories until only 50 lines 
>> or so remain in the actual container code.
> 
> Ok. So are you saying Fortress would be scalable enough to include Merlin's
> features as needed?

I wouldn't dare say anything as controversial as that! :P

Thing is, if you build a container out of components, then you can put 
those components inside a container. Layered complexity, if you will. I 
can't see why you couldn't layer merlin's features on top of fortress. I 
also can't see why you can't do it the other way around.

I'm also not sure whether any of that is a good idea.

Keep in mind that the last time I tried and completely grok merlins 
internals was roughly three refactorings ago. It looks rather alien to 
me at the moment :D

cheers!

- LSD


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org