<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Segoe UI";
panose-1:2 11 5 2 4 2 4 2 2 3;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
span.apple-style-span
{mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>>>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'> erlang-questions-bounces@erlang.org [mailto:erlang-questions-bounces@erlang.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Torben Hoffmann<br><br></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I think that Object Process Methodology (used lightly) and Message Sequence Charts are better ways of structuring your high level thoughts.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>>>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Hi Torben,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Found a reflection of my voice in you!<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I am contemplating to compile a specification of what a system is and does as stated using OPM/OPL, into (and run on) an Erlang AOS (Application Operating System, as Joe puts it!). <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>There is some “impedance” mismatch between the “symbols” (ideas) of OPL and Erlang, though in spirit, I (want to) believe that Erlang AOS is a perfect (i.e. isomorphic) vehicle for materializing a “OPL system”. To give some examples:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>1) A “process” of OPM is not an “Erlang process” – well, yes & no! <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>2) Moreover, an “OPM object” needs to find an expression in “Erlang process” – again, yes & no! <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>3) OPM maintains the duality of “objects and processes”, whereas Erlang wants to see every_thing_ as a “process”. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>4) For OPM, “objects” are the things that are shaped and take shape, and “processes” are the things that shape the objects – i.e. “shape” is both a verb and noun. In Erlang, what gets shaped is also a process, and what shapes is obviously a process.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>5) I am not confident enough to say something on “state” in OPM and “state” in Erlang.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>My present view of world is as shown (& determined) by classic C with Unix-IPC. I don’t know other worlds. I haven’t made much of progress in Erlang AOS either, beyond few readings of Joe’s thesis paper. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I am currently stuck on integrating the spirit of OPM/OPL and spirit of Erlang AOS. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Is there some work going around in OPM and Erlang that can help me unlock spiritually? Or, may I receive some help from you on how you materialize a OPM-thought system into an Erlang system? Some directions are good enough – I know otherwise this is a topic of a full volume.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Thank you<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Kind regards<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Avinash<o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>