18 |
- Are there any APIs out there that already support our needs? |
- Are there any APIs out there that already support our needs? |
19 |
|
|
20 |
- Do we want implicit or explicit observers? |
- Do we want implicit or explicit observers? |
21 |
Gzz used explicit observing, due |
Gzz used explicit observing, due to having an object per cell. However, |
22 |
to having an object per cell. However, the tradeoffs are different |
the tradeoffs are different here. |
|
here. |
|
23 |
|
|
24 |
The benefits of implicit observing are ease and purity of the functional |
The benefits of implicit observing are ease and purity of the functional |
25 |
approach: in the explicit approach, forgetting a single obs somewhere will |
approach: in the explicit approach, forgetting a single obs somewhere will |
144 |
|
|
145 |
RESOLVED: Fenfires spring out of swamps ;) |
RESOLVED: Fenfires spring out of swamps ;) |
146 |
|
|
147 |
|
- Should we also allow a different kind of observation for making functional |
148 |
|
programming efficient? Right now, for each function value you cache, you |
149 |
|
need to create a new Object for the Obs. |
150 |
|
|
151 |
|
RESOLVED: Not yet. We may, at some point, want to put in the functional |
152 |
|
part right into swamp itself... |
153 |
|
|
154 |
|
|
155 |
Problems with jena |
Problems with jena |
156 |
================== |
================== |
157 |
|
|
339 |
public void close(); |
public void close(); |
340 |
} |
} |
341 |
|
|
342 |
|
The find methods with Obses are included in ObservableGraph because |
343 |
|
this allows the cheap default implementation of ObservedGraph. |
344 |
|
In an autogenerated implementation, ObservedGraph would also be generated |
345 |
|
for efficiency. |
346 |
|
|
347 |
|
|
348 |
|
|