Re: A working document

On Fri, 21 Dec 2001, Cezary Zielinski wrote:

[...]
> 3) Are codels pure code? (no data structures). That would imply
> disjunction between code and data which is contrary to object
> oriented paradigm, which has its benefits.

In my interpretation, a codel is both ``action'' and ``state'', and
even more: exceptions/signals/events (whatever you might call them),
and pre/post-conditions etc. In other words, a codel _could_ be the
smallest component possible/needed in a system. (I am saying that it
_should_ be the smallest component!)


> 4) I would suggest a change in terminology. Instead of using the
> term "database" I would use the term "component image". Database has
> a slightly different meaning in computer science. In this case the
> outside world (other components) percive the component through the
> exported image. This compnent perceives other components through
> imported image. Thus we have a component image.

I like this statement. Do you have any links to published computer
science literature where this concept of ``component image'' is
documented?

> 5) The question wether communication should be handled within codels
> or outside I would answer in favour of - inside. After all we want
> to hide from the user all the unnecessary details - he/she should
> concentrate on the task not on the communication details. Maybe
> special communication codels would do the trick (an intermediate
> solution).

I (at first thought) would prefer the latter approach. And my
motivation is that, whenever possible, it is nice to separate
functionality from communication. Of course, this cannot hold for the
middleware components, whose functionality _is_ communication :-)

Herman