Alex Rousskov wrote:
We know how poor humans are at writing bug-free code. I think that
being able to validate much of P code off-line is an essential rule
language feature that we should strive to preserve. Unfortunately,
that seems to require informing the interpreter of service interface,
independent of P code itself.
You start convincing me... Could any of the existing service
description languages (WSDL?) be of help? Abbie was suggesting this
before I believe...
I see the following options:
(1) Rely on the rules authors to specify the correct parameters
and don't do any offline checking -> no mechanisms for service
description needed
(2) Have an OPES specific "service interface description language"
(maybe similar to function declarations in some programming
languages?) -> would be part of the rules language (?)
(3) Rely on an existing solution and require OPES services to be
described in this language -> nothing to do for us other than
refering to existing solution.
Now, my feeling this that this already goes into discussing the
solution, I don't see a need to specify any of this in the re-charter.
The proposed charter text seems to cover and allow for this work, so I
would assume we're ok in this respect.
P.S. If P programs are "rules", what should we call P programmers?
Rulers? :-)
Sure, OPES rules :)
-Markus