MOO-cows Mailing List Archive
Cross-MOO OOP Code Sharing (WAS: "verbing properties" and related issues)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 23:43:46 PDT
From: Fiona McCrae <email@example.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The problem with sharing generic objects between moos is not encapsulation, but object number reconciliation. I know Quinn's Generic Clothing is shared on many MOOs, I ported it to my own once. It was a fornicating pain in the donkey, all because my object numbers had no chance in purgatory of matching those of the source MOO.
I think the #1 feature that would solve this is the implemention of a cross-MOO or globaly unique numbering system. I know every anti-Microsoft person in the world is about to flood my mailbox, but to simplify porting we need something like an OLE GUID. Thus a reference to Quins Generic Clothing is exactly the same on every MOO.
This is almost provided by properties on #0 ($clothing for example). It's just not adhered to very well, mostly because of the bloat on #0 and the security implications of letting any user publish an object by making a property on #0. We also have the problem of duality. What if Azure Guest's Generic Clothing seems better to me and I'd rather use it than what $clothing points to?
I have no solutions to offer... it's just something that annoys me, and misery loves company.
From: Nick Ingolia[SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, August 02, 1996 12:03 AM
Subject: Re: "verbing properties" and related issues
...several unfortunate side effects. Most notable among these is a lack of
"reusable objects". One of the chief advantages cited for object-
oriented programming is the reusability of code in an OO environment. It
is worth noting that there are virtually no generic objects being shared
Subject Index |