Re: Object interfaces to Vsta

>Wouldn't it be a good idea to create an object oriented interface to
>system services, libraries etc ? Now should be the right time to do this,
>before Vsta grows too much.

Like most, I don't think we should force C++ on people. A long time
ago (6 months or more), I was thinking very deeply about an object
system for VSTa. My idea was to use the CORBA ideas, and to create an
IDL to C compiler. My reasoning for using IDL is that it is language
independent, but is a good language for defining *interfaces*, while
not forcing any given implementation. As such, we can use IDL to
specify what services will be available from a given server (object if
you like), but we can feel free to code it any way we want, giving us
a nice "meta-level". I still think this is a viable, and indeed
desirable thing to do, though it might be good to do this outside the
mainstream VSTa development. Some parts (like defining a messaging
protocol, and interface repository) would be good in general though.

BTW. One objection I have to the "natural" approach that joerg talks
about is that "naturalness" is necessarily tied to societal and
cultural background/values, so what might be natural for people from
the USA, will be almost incomprehensible to someone from China. In an
artificial system, the best we can hope for is to develop a
universally understood *artificial* system, like calculus, to act as a
bridge. OOP is a good example of this (ie. many people do not think of
"objects" but everyone understands bytes).

While I am very hesitant to recommend it, there is an IDL to C++
complier in X11R6 (in Fresco). I prefer the IDL CFE from the OMG, but
getting a C compiler from that might be more work. Just in case
someone wants to *try* IDL :-)

Once MADO is done, I *will* be looking into this again.
 
Received on Wed Aug 17 08:50:09 1994