home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!decwrl!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!ames!agate!doc.ic.ac.uk!uknet!glasgow!jack
- From: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
- Newsgroups: comp.object
- Subject: Re: objects and closures
- Message-ID: <Bx96n9.23u@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk>
- Date: 5 Nov 92 17:16:20 GMT
- References: <BEVAN.92Nov3182229@hippo.cs.man.ac.uk> <1992Nov4.185859@cs.man.ac.uk> <BEVAN.92Nov4192947@hippo.cs.man.ac.uk>
- Reply-To: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
- Organization: COMANDOS Project, Glesga Yoonie
- Lines: 21
-
- mario@cs.man.ac.uk (Mario Wolczko) writes:
- >> You could always use a language which has closure(goto) and lets you
- >> the _user_ add the syntax necessary to represent object(while) when
- >> and if they want it.
- > Sounds nice -- but can it be done efficiently (both in space and speed
- > of method dispatch)? Anyone know of any successful examples?
-
- Paul Philbrow here did that a few years ago in PS-algol, which makes
- closures considerably more useful by allowing them to be persistent. The
- syntax was horrifying (PS-algol is not exactly readable at the best of
- times, and Paul's extensions were the stuff of nightmare) but the
- performance on method dispatch for persistent objects far outclassed any
- OODB of the time, and the space overheads were tiny (though PS-algol's
- space management for persistent closures could be better). I am not sure
- if this was published - Paul?
-
- --
- -- Jack Campin room G092, Computing Science Department, Glasgow University,
- 17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ, Scotland TEL: 041 339 8855 x6854 (work)
- INTERNET: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk or via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk FAX: 041 330 4913
- BANG!net: via mcsun and uknet BITNET: via UKACRL UUCP: jack@glasgow.uucp
-