Taxonomy of Facets & Composites

[Ken Kahn]

MarkM wrote
>
> At the "laws of physics" level, there are only objects, not facets or
> composites.  An object is a combination of state and behavior.  Using
Norm's
> note, I'd further say that the behavior computes new state and outgoing
> messages as a function of the current state and the incoming message.

Maybe I should read Norm's note but in what sense is it a function?
Mathematical? What about non-deterministic behaviors? It may select randomly
between alternative clauses for example.

My real objection to this statement is that it is only true (modulo
non-determinism) when an object is viewed from real close. (Where you can
see its state and every outgoing message.) From afar you send a message and
the object may send all sorts of messages to others and only reply after
getting lots of responses. So its behavior can depend upon the state of the
transitive closure of all the objects it can reach. And what does that mean
in a concurrent framework? A global snapshot is rarely a coherent notion.

Putting the problem another way, an aggregate of objects isn't an object by
this definition. Are objects to be thought of as the "quarks" of this
physics?

Best,

-ken