[MUD-Dev] Object and class heirarchies -- are they really necessary?
darius at connect.com.au
Wed Mar 29 13:33:52 New Zealand Daylight Time 2000
>>> Par Winzell wrote
> J C Lawrence writes:
> > FWIW: Larry McVoy (BK author) is keen to see BK used as an embedded
> > tool FWIW and has been conciously re-writing some of the APIs and
> > access points to make it easier to embed. I could easily see having
> > an external DB (ala MySQL, SOLID, (g/n/*)dbm, whatever) with the
> > edit interfaces running thru BK for all object code changes...
> This is very exciting! I spent some time searching the net for library
> implementions of RCS, but failed utterly. I was ready to call binaries
> for the revision control aspects of the Skotos development system, due
> for implementation in the weeks to come. I'll definitely take a closer
> look at BitKeeper when they do their source release.
Ditto that - the idea of plugging something like BitKeeper into an
object-aware framework, allowing builders to check their objects in and
keep a record of changes, is kinda appealing. Especially given some other
work with clients and xml-rpc and so forth we've got bubbling... Treating
the engine as a centralised repository for all manner of objects gets really
(Darius wanders off, mumbling to himself)
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
More information about the MUD-Dev