4 ms·
Makes me think of this paper "Open, extensible object models" by Ian Piumarta and Alessandro Warth: https://www.piumarta.com/software/id-objmodel/objmodel2.pdf
by nielsbot 3y ago
Makes me think of this paper "Open, extensible object models" by Ian Piumarta and Alessandro Warth:
https://www.piumarta.com/software/id-objmodel/objmodel2.pdf https://www.piumarta.com/software/id-objmodel/objmodel2.pdf
The focus is on the object runtime where almost any operation including method lookup can be changed inside the end user environment.
- jauntywundrkind 3y agoI just posted a bit of a love letter to Inversion of Control into the related submission: coding felt like I was building each brick from the bottom up, but IoC let me feel like there was a competent responsible place where all the objects & providers were, where they could be flexibly built out & instrumented. With incredible APIs for dynamically modifying or introspecting what this world of entities & the runtime machinery/factories/&c was. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39460840 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39460840 Spring Framework & other Java IoC/DI stuff was pretty amazing. I kept finding new cool layers of depth as I dove into the model. I love the idea of programming languages that might better integrate some of these ideas, of instrumentability. I'm not sure if it's actually necessary though; maybe having all these code assemblers living in userland libraries is fine. Thanks for the link! Not sure if I've run into this VPRI / Warth combo paper, & worth revisiting either way.