Re: [eclipse-users] Suspension lists

From: Malcolm Ryan <malcolmr_at_...25...>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:39:37 +1000
On 10/09/2007, at 12:22 PM, Kish Shen wrote:

> Kish Shen wrote:
>> The global priority system is far from ideal, but we have not been  
>> able to come up with something better, and we have thought about  
>> this for a long time. In the end, it seems to be better than what  
>> other CLP allows -- which I think is just basically a single  
>> priority for suspended goal,
> I should have added: we would be very interested in hearing ideas  
> about how to have a better priority system, which
> a) can be used across different modules (i.e. libraries), without  
> the user needing to know what priorities are used elsewhere
> b) be implemented efficiently

I can see that it is a non-trivial problem. The beginnings of a  
solution might be:

1) Each module has a local priority-based system, along the lines of  
what already exists, but with an open ended range (no arbitrary cut  
off at 12).
2) Programmers can explicitly create a partial ordering by stating  
how this module related to others, either higher or lower.
3) The command-line is always the bottom. It has no numeric priority.

This would encourage encapsulation, and the priorities of everything  
in a module would not be open to inspection, nor would they need to  
be. I imagine you would typically include ordering statements  
alongside your imports, stating that the imported modules have higher  
precedence. It would also give the programmer a lot more room to move  
within individual modules.

Could this be implemented efficiently? I'm not sure. It depends on  
how efficient you need it to be.


      "The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all
       the exhilaration of a vice."
                                     - G.K.Chesterton A Defense of  
Received on Mon Sep 10 2007 - 03:41:12 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Aug 20 2019 - 09:14:20 CEST