Re: [swarm-hackers] Re: Host platform dependence (was Naming conventions)

[Bill Northcott]

On 19/11/2009, at 5:13 PM, Scott Christley wrote:
> Yeah, it's true, the 'model' word is bad, right behind it is 'system' and 
> 'paradigm' and many others.

No argument there.  I tried to qualify paradigm with UI to make it clearer.
> 
> Anyways, I'm using the word model in the same context you are.  The 
> integration piece I'm talking about is the ObserverSwarm.  This is part of 
> the Swarm design and defines how the simulation of the model is observed.  
> The observation could be a GUI but its also possible to be non-GUI like 
> saving data into a file.
> 
> No it's not typically part of the modeller's model, but it is part of the 
> Swarm Library.  The distinction is well defined.  The interface is not.  
> According to the Swarm design, the ObserverSwarm object is also a Swarm 
> object.
> 
> But let me put my "Glen Ropella" hat on for moment, some modeller actually 
> may consider the act of observation to be part of the model.  No its not 
> common, but its valid.

I really can't go with that.  I don't get this as quantum physics.  IMHO the 
MVC paradigm is seriously useful, which is part of why Rails is so sweet.  
Violating it by mixing the M and the V leads down a path beset by dragons.  It 
may be valid, but it is very perilous.

Cheers
Bill

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature