🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Bx56G1.8pr@cs.uiuc.edu>, johnson@cs.uiuc.edu (Ralph Johnson) writes:
|> baragry@latcs1.lat.OZ.AU (Jason M Baragry) writes:
|> 
 
|> This is exactly the way I program in Smalltalk.  I don't HAVE to know the
|> specifics of the interfaces of the components because they all use
|> standard interfaces.  I can put a Wrapper around any VisualCOmponent and
|> can stick any number of them in a VisualComposite.  I don't have to know
|> the parameters of the display routine or how to determine the location of
|> a component.  Since they are all VisualComponents, they all have the same
|> parameters and use the same operation for returning the location.
|> 
|> Common interfaces eliminate the need for module interconnection languages.
|> A MIL is way of hooking components together even when they do not have
|> similar interfaces.  You still have to do a bit of work to connect them.
|> 
	I agree with your example, but don't you think that this is limited to
the Object Orientated domain??? I realize OO is supposed to increase re-use by
thinking in terms of objects, but what about conventional design paradigms:
Data Flow, Rule-Based, etc.

	I've read a bit of Mary Shaw's (CMU/SEI) work on software architecture
and agree with her that large scale software systems will require a combination
of many subsystems, each of which may be designed in a different paradigm
and implemented in a different lanuguage.

	At this large-scale system level, SE and EE are not so comparable.
EE has only modular design and can only be implemented in analog or digital
components with standard interfaces between the two. SE faces the problem
of having to connect components from different programming languages which
do not have standard "connectors" (this is where software buses will be 
useful, haven't heard of the Parts system though).

	I guess the question is, "How do we re-use at a module or component
level when we have so many implementation mediums?" Should the choice of
module be based on characteristics such as speed and size (as in EE) and 
implementation details be covered up by the software bus / Parts system,
or should the programming language used to implement it be a factor when
choosing a software component to re-use??

Jason Baragry