From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Jul 28 14:16:42 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) id OAA05211 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 28 Jul 1995 14:16:42 -0700 Received: from gndrsh.aac.dev.com (gndrsh.aac.dev.com [198.145.92.241]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id OAA05197 for ; Fri, 28 Jul 1995 14:16:38 -0700 Received: (from rgrimes@localhost) by gndrsh.aac.dev.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id OAA02502; Fri, 28 Jul 1995 14:16:42 -0700 From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <199507282116.OAA02502@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> Subject: Re: To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 14:16:41 -0700 (PDT) Cc: dennis@et.htp.com, hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <8795.806963779@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Jul 28, 95 01:36:19 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1000 Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk ... > There is a better way, and it's called the Object model.. No, I'm not > a C++ or Smalltalk fanatic, and I think that the whole OOP thing has > actually been considerably over-hyped, but this is one instance where > the fundamental tennets of object orientation are quite sound. Files > should be objects with extensible, inheritable behaviors. Instead of > ioctl()'ing them, you should send them messages which propagate up the > inheritance chain as necessary. You should also be able to have > arbitrary properties that can be associated with them as necessary, > thus ending the "suffix bodge" once and for all. Sounds like Aegis (aka Domain/OS) to me :-). Is that where you are drawing your ``object model'' from? If so, maybe we have a very common ground here that we would both just _love_ to see done in a BSD based system. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com Accurate Automation Company Reliable computers for FreeBSD