[cap-talk] How desirable / feasible is a persistent OCAP language?
naasking at higherlogics.com
Fri Jul 18 18:10:07 CDT 2008
Stiegler, Marc D wrote:
> On a normal day this is really cool. But on a bad day -- and bad days
> occur too often to just write them off as anomalies -- this can be a
> serious problem.
While I agree upgrade is a tough problem, I think it's one that a
compiler or runtime should have enough semantic information to solve (or
it should not be too much of a burden to specify sufficient information
I have not yet studied the literature in depth, but researchers have
built many dynamically patchable systems in C and ML, and upgrading
persisted objects should be a straight extension of live upgrade. If it
can be done for C, I can imagine it could only get easier for a language
with more type information.
Here are the references to these systems that I've saved for later study:
More information about the cap-talk