4 ms·

Could someone give hints/pointers that help me understand the following? "parsing non-command messages in each process ... not a strong attempt to intertwine a

Could someone give hints/pointers that help me understand the following? "parsing non-command messages in each process ... not a strong attempt to intertwine a real language around the message structures (this very same thing happened with http" Does that mean the messages should have been part of a coherent protocol or spec? That there should have been some thought behind how messages compose into new messages?

alankay1 10y ago
Smalltalk was an early attempt at non-command-messages to objects with the realization that you get a "programming language" if you take some care with the conventions used for composing the messages.
- infinite8s 10y ago
  By non-command-messages do you mean that the receiver was free to ignore the message?
  - alankay1 10y ago
    Yes
    - bcjordan 10y ago
      Akin to "signals" / "event emitters"?
      - alankay1 10y ago
        If you think about the "whole system", even if it's just a Shannon channel, what do you actually need?