Hi YKY, If your code will be open source lisp, then I have a few points learned from my experience at Cycorp.
(1) Franz has a very good Common Lisp (Allegro) IDE for Windows and Linux, but is closed source (2) Steel Bank Common Lisp is open source, derived from CMU Common Lisp. Recent SBCL versions include an IDE but I have no experience with that. (3) Franz has a run-time license fee for applications used in a commercial environment (4) Cycorp developed with Allegro lisp but wrote their own runtime to avoid the Franz runtime fee, and to achieve smaller image size plus higher (2x) performance. (5) Cyc also ran on CMU Common Lisp (6) Cycorp implemented Cyc as an HTTP server in order to avoid writing any potentially non-portable GUI code in lisp (7) Scheme is a lisp dialect but I have no experience with it I have chosen Java for my own work because compared to lisp it is much faster, and there is a vast community of open source libraries that can be glued into a Java project. When I wrote a like-performing version of Fluid Construction Grammar in Java, it was 5x faster than the original (Allegro) Common Lisp version whose object structure and behavior I closely followed. Given your commitment to lisp I suggest that you if you care about performance then you should stay away from using nested lists as a data structure when a specific object type suffices. I also learned at Cycorp that performance is important, and that algorithm design trumps implementation language and even CPU speed. Cheers. -Steve Stephen L. Reed Artificial Intelligence Researcher http://texai.org/blog http://texai.org 3008 Oak Crest Ave. Austin, Texas, USA 78704 512.791.7860 ----- Original Message ---- From: YKY (Yan King Yin) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: agi@v2.listbox.com Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 11:37:06 PM Subject: Re: [agi] open or closed source for AGI project? On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 8:23 AM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't think that's a major difference conceptually, as there's a > constant-time > conversion between the two representations. In my approach (which is not even implemented yet) the KB contains rules that are used to construct propositional Bayesian networks. The rules contain variables in the sense of FOL. It's not clear how this is done in OCP. There are other differences with OCP, as you know I plan to use PZB logic, and I've written part of a Lisp prototype. I'm not sure what's the best way to opensource it -- integrating with OCP, or as a separate branch, or..? YKY ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=117534816-b15a34 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
