Flex machine: Difference between revisions
Undid revision 315864696 by 116.68.74.8 (talk) |
m Date maintenance tags and general fixes |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Context|date=October 2009}} |
|||
{{context}} |
|||
{{confuse|FLEX (operating system)}} |
{{confuse|FLEX (operating system)}} |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
==Alan Kay's FLEX system== |
==Alan Kay's FLEX system== |
||
[[Alan Kay]] developed his Flex system in the late 1960s while exploring ideas that would later evolve into the [[Smalltalk]] [[programming language]]. |
[[Alan Kay]] developed his Flex system in the late 1960s while exploring ideas that would later evolve into the [[Smalltalk]] [[programming language]].<ref>[http://www.mprove.de/diplom/gui/kay68.html FLEX – A flexible extendable language]</ref> |
||
==RSRE FLEX Computer System== |
==RSRE FLEX Computer System== |
||
Revision as of 23:38, 4 October 2009
 | This article provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject. (October 2009) |
In computing, there have been multiple systems named FLEX.
Alan Kay's FLEX system
Alan Kay developed his Flex system in the late 1960s while exploring ideas that would later evolve into the Smalltalk programming language.[1]
RSRE FLEX Computer System
Royal Signals and Radar Establishment (RSRE) developed its Flex Computer System [2] in Malvern, England, during the 1980s. It used a tagged storage scheme to implement a capability architecture, and was designed for the safe and efficient implementation of strongly-typed procedures.
There were (at least) two incarnations of Flex, implemented using hardware with writable microcode. The first was supplied by Logica to a RSRE design, and the second used an ICL PERQ [1]. The microcode alone was responsible for storage allocation, deallocation and garbage collection. This immediately precluded a whole class of errors arising from the misuse (deliberate or accidental) of pointers.
Another notable feature of Flex was the tagged, write-once filestore. This allowed arbitrary code and data structures to be written and retrieved transparently, without recourse to external encodings. Data could thus be passed safely from program to program.
In a similar way, remote capabilities allowed data and procedures on other machines to be accessed over a network connection, again without the application program being involved in external encodings of data, parameters or result values.
The whole scheme allowed abstract data types to be safely implemented, as data items and the procedures permitted to access them could be bound together, and the resulting capability passed freely around. The capability would grant access to the procedures, but could not be used in any way to obtain access to the data.