Oops again! In my haste to cut down and post the 4th instalment (01)
> MACK basics - 4th instalment: Reality and our Architected Model (02)
... at last, I removed the material I had been preparing on
orthogonality (to put it rather into the 5th instalment) but
consequently neglected to adequately spell out the interim message
on hemming-in those malicious and incompetent programmers. (03)
In the 4th instalment (at this point
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=ontolog-forum&i=084401c8a585%249e4ae140%240100a8c0%40Dev#nid048)
I had built up to this: (04)
> And here we may shout out our long-awaited Corollary which is
> the basis for solving the core problem and brings about that
> long-sought taming of the errant programmer: METHODS ONLY
> HAVE ACCESS TO FACTS-IN-CONTEXT, and absolutely nothing more.
> There is no general-purpose programming, no file access and no
> other i/o capability, at least not unless it is explicitly and
> specifically allowed, and even such options will only be
> relevant during the transitional phase before pure MACK
> environments without application system legacies are finally
> achieved. (05)
There are two further points which need bringing out at this
stage: (06)
1. All interaction between a method and the rest of the system is
via fact reads and writes, all obviously in-Context, hence
completely hemmed-in by the respective Form in the Context, all as
enforced by the AOS; and (07)
2. In a pure MACK environment the procedural-language programmer
will write nothing but Relationship methods of various kinds, and
that includes the "REmethods" you may have encountered in my old
web material. The MACK method _is_ a Relationship method. And
there is one and only one main program: it's the AOS. (08)
Problem solved (once that pure MACK environment can be achieved,
of course, but there is a whole strategy for that, with its
necessarily slow and careful early stages). (09)
By the way, those considerations are what lay behind this clause
in my post to John Sowa here:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=ontolog-forum&i=007d01c88937%2416a86380%240100a8c0%40Dev#nid07
: (010)
> [...] since semantic considerations must surely provide the
> relevant measures for the scopes of permissions and
> authorizations [...] (011)
But what if we - or all those programmers! - cannot live with such
restriction and discipline? The extensive but coherent answer to
that fear will start in the 5th instalment. (012)
Then you will also begin to appreciate the subtitle of the 4th
instalment, "Reality and our Architected Model". Clearly, our
model, so meagre at this stage, needs a whole lot more
supplementing before it can begin to do justice to our lived
reality (our presently-programmed reality being much more easily
equalled and surpassed...). (013)
Christopher (014)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (015)
|