[gme-users] RE: [udm-users] BON2 vs. UDM

[Aditya Agrawal]

I think that the point is not to find fault in the different tools but
to consolidate them to form a better tool, not have redundant effort. I
may be missing the big picture and I will appreciate it if some one
could fill me in on the larger goal of having both approaches.

Below are comments on Akos' earlier mail.


> First of all the whole premise is false in my view. It is
> like saying let's do away with C++ and only use Java. Death
> to all C++ programmers!

[Adi] 
C++ and Java are different languages developed and propagated by
different vendors. BON and UDM are both C++ based providing similar but
slightly different API's. Gme still have Java, COM, python and other
such API's as well.

> It is simple: if you do not like/want to use BON2, then don't.

[Adi] 
This is true. However, a considerable effort is being spend on both
these tools/API's and if we merge them we can get the best of both
worlds as well as have a more people working on complementing each other
rather than competing. Another issue is that new students and staff have
to potentially lean both these interfaces.

> Now, some more technical points. BON2 is GME-specific, UDM
> is a generic tool. So, there are GME-specific things
> that you can do with BON2, that you cannot do with UDM.
> 
> For example, you can write add-ons with BON2. YOu can have
> access to editing events. You have access to the gme registry
> of objects. Finally, BON2 uses on-demand instantiation of
> objects. The BON-extender interpreter gives you control on
> how you want to have your API generated. It also parses
> existing interpreters, so that user code is preserved.
> Furthermore, it uses the GME meta-model, not an automatically
> translated one, so you do not have to deal with the "hacks"
> the translator does for you. And what it does not do (see
> Adi's very short "in favor of BON2" points :)

[Adi] 
1. UDM can also be used to write Add Ons
2. UDM allows you to access the "name" and "position" registry values.
We are yet to come up with a project where we need more.
3. UDM has been using the on demand stuff since the beginning. 
4. Being Generic and decoupled from GME and MetaGME has always been an
advantage.
5. Having event notification I believe is an attribute of gme's
interpreter interface and so theoretically even UDM should be able to
use it.

Does this also mean that there are no answers to the points I raised
against BON? :)

Thanks,
Adi