In which topics business objects is/will using cal?

Question

<p>Hi, I repeat my question from my last post as a new topic. </p><p>In which areas is or will your company business objects using the new language?</p><p>Klaus </p>

Answer 1

Hi Klaus,
Sorry about that. Â
The Quark Framework was designed to allow the creation of layers of semantic models (functional DSL's/combinator libraries) which provide the building blocks for applications to build specific data behaviour. Our motivating interest was therefore around how data can be described, transformations composed and target data projected from a general data manipulation 'engine'. By having the Quark Platform be very general, and all the data modeling and manipulation driven by dynamically loadable modules with dynamically composable elements, you have a powerful stack that can be extended and customised, and you provide a very rich capability to applications (who can use this 'canvas' as a way to achieve a broad range of bespoke data behaviour). Plus, of course, the level of validation in this sort of system is so much higher than a 'normally' implemented bespoke OO stack would be (that's not to say you can't create abstractions that add this... but ultimately you end up with something like the Quark Framework!).
In the Quark Framework we have seeded, the highest-level, most abstract data module you can see is the Sql module (and SqlBuilder etc.). However, we have created a large number of even more abstract modules for describing all sorts of data semantics. These have been and are being used in commercial products, as well as other prototypes in both the Business Objects Research Group and the wider Labs organisation.
I have recently added a "Sneak Peek" section to the main Quark Framework Labs page.  This has a few videos of a Labs project that will soon be available for download. In this case, this is only a Labs prototype, but if you watch the videos, you will see functionality that manipulates data using the aforementioned Quark Framework modules. Take special note of the what the Designer can do, and imagine that, as the user is combining data objects and adding calculations, elements of various 'functional DSLs' are being combined to express objects at a higher level of data abstraction. Ultimately, these compositions can be transformed to other data languages, or to functional systems that manipulate data values directly.
BTW, we do not use the Quark Framework in parts of applications where regular OO seems 'more appropriate' (UI, comms, application state logic, persistence, etc.) - i.e. most of the volume. We are specifically interested in this technology where we want more formal, declaratively described behaviour and the robustness of strictly-typed composition. To us, this pertains best to data and metadata description and transformation.
Does that answer your question?