Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
project_qfwfq_notes [2011-11-10 12:41] – davegriffithsproject_qfwfq_notes [2011-11-10 16:13] (current) – davegriffiths
Line 1: Line 1:
-====Brainstorming space====+======Recycling from the original FET proposal====== 
 + 
 +In general (as a FET proposal) much more specific and product centred than we have been discussing - seems like it is a subset of what we want to do, mostly specific to VPLs. 
 + 
 +==Feature list for a language== 
 + 
 +Important VPL features (”Simple things should be simple. Complex things should be possible.” -A. 
 +Kay) 
 +  * multiparadigm VPL (eg. capable of dataflow, message passing, onion skinning, grids) 
 +  * introspection (eg. language level inspection of active constructs) 
 +  * metaprogramming (eg. programs that write programs) 
 +  * distributed (eg. cluster or GRID based) 
 +  * high level as well as low level constructs 
 + 
 +Important editor features (“Things should be as simple as possible, but no simpler.” - A. Einstein) 
 +  * uses graphical metaphors and tools   
 +  * supports interactive, incremental development 
 +  * uses language features for debugging and testing 
 +  * capable of editing textual representations if required 
 +  * multiple views / resolutions 
 +  * automatic layout / presentation (n<10^6 nodes) 
 +  * flexible / extensible 
 + 
 +Perhaps it's useful to minimise the distinction between language and IDE? 
 + 
 +This is stuff which we haven't focused/elaborated on: 
 + 
 +==Scalability== 
 + 
 +"One of the major reasons for the lack of adoption has been the scalability of visual programs, as there 
 +has been little (if any) successful work in scaling the well documented benefits achievable with small 
 +systems (on the level of 1000s of lines of C code), to systems on the scale of a kernel (Linux is 
 +approx. 2x10^6 lines of C) or an operating system (Redhat 7 is approx. 3x10^7 lines of text based 
 +code). While ‘lines of code’ is not necessarily an effective measure of a program (or system’s) 
 +complexity it does give an indication as to the relative scale of such code-bases." 
 + 
 +==(Automatic) Interfaces with external libraries== 
 + 
 +"For any language to be of general use currently (and in the future), it requires interfaces to enable 
 +interoperation with commonly used libraries and hardware in heterogeneous computer systems." 
 + 
 +"This design would incorporate ideas from existing, large scale networked software distribution projects, such as CPAN, (the Comprehensive Perl Archive Network), CTAN (for TeX), Debian (with over 100,000 software packages running on 11 architectures). While it is beyond the scope of the project to establish or administer such a network, it 
 +is a necessary step for future adoption of the language, so warrants some investigation. We anticipate that extending existing software would provide the required features." 
 + 
 +==Different application areas== 
 + 
 +  * Prototyping: "The major strengths that the Qfwfq system has over existing software systems are in rapid 
 +prototyping and design. Currently RAD (rapid application development) and RSP (rapid systems 
 +prototyping) tools are in use in every major industry and are becoming a more important part of the 
 +workflow." 
 +  * Media industry 
 +  * Distributed computing 
 +  * Sensor networks 
 +  * GIS (geographical information systems) 
 +  * HEP (high energy physics) 
 + 
 +======Brainstorming======
  
 ===Range of interesting technologies=== ===Range of interesting technologies===
Line 85: Line 141:
     * Debugging techniques     * Debugging techniques
  
-====Initial 2011 reset====+======Initial 2011 reset======
  
 ===Core motivations=== ===Core motivations===
  • project_qfwfq_notes.1320928916.txt.gz
  • Last modified: 2011-11-10 12:41
  • by davegriffiths