On 7/26/2011 8:34 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 3:28 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
why do we need an HLL distribution language, rather than, say, a
low-level distribution language, such as bytecode or a VM-level
ASM-like format, or
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 11:14 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
one can support ifdef blocks in the IL, no real problem there.
Those seem like a problem all by themselves. Definitions are inflexible,
lacking in domain of language types and lack effective support for complex
ad-hoc decisions
On 7/27/2011 2:12 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 11:14 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
one can support ifdef blocks in the IL, no real problem there.
Those seem like a problem all by themselves. Definitions are
inflexible, lacking in domain of
On Jul 26, 2011, at 8:45 PM, Casey Ransberger casey.obrie...@gmail.com wrote:
Worth pointing out that server side JS dodges this problem. Now that Node
is out there, people are actually starting to do stuff with JS that doesn't
run on the client, so it's happening... whether or not it's a
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 3:41 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
a non-turing-complete IL is too limited to do much of anything useful with
WRT developing actual software...
You aren't alone in holding this uninformed, reactionary opinion.
Consider: Do we need Turing power for 3D apps? No.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 9:35 AM, David Barbour dmbarb...@gmail.com wrote:
unnecessary or drastic change may often be seen as evil.
hence, the status quo is king...
A despotic king, perhaps.
Apologies. The status quo, as it exists, allows for its own change.
We should not place the
On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 19:28 -0700, Casey Ransberger wrote:
Please forgive - not a physicist.
Ian mentioned something about a Bose-Einstein Condensate for computer
programming once, and this really jumped out at me.
I've seen math and I've seen biology applied, at least in metaphor, to
On 7/27/2011 6:37 AM, David Goehrig wrote:
On Jul 26, 2011, at 8:45 PM, Casey Ransberger
casey.obrie...@gmail.com mailto:casey.obrie...@gmail.com wrote:
Worth pointing out that server side JS dodges this problem. Now
that Node is out there, people are actually starting to do stuff with
There is way too much back in forth about various things.
I just want to comment on one of the many.
PostScript is indeed over-specified, and was a mistake carried through to
perfection by powering James Gosling's NeWS windowing server.
I have links somewhere on my blog that talk about various
I wasn't able to find your link.
But I must say: splitting a complex image into a thousand parts for
rendering and stitching them back together in real-time, is the sort of
problem that quickly becomes painful and tedious even if you have a good
approach to it.
Regards,
Dave
On Wed, Jul 27,
On 7/27/2011 9:35 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 3:41 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
a non-turing-complete IL is too limited to do much of anything
useful with WRT developing actual software...
You aren't alone in holding this
Casey,
You can see physical types in ontologies. There are many ontological
approaches, starting from the religious beliefs of Plato and Aristotle (one
true essence of things) thru Semantic Web hipe (one true logic of things) to
the more practical ontological languages.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:40 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
I think fitness and merit are some often misunderstood ideas.
People understand just fine that a solution of technical merit can fail due
to market forces, positioning, and fear of change. But they don't need to
like it.
the
On 7/27/2011 1:52 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:40 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
I think fitness and merit are some often misunderstood ideas.
People understand just fine that a solution of technical merit can
fail due to market forces,
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 1:30 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
one does need recursion/... for many things to work.
Even if we do have recursion, it does not imply being Turing-powerful.
Primitive recursion and total recursion both terminate.
But we don't need recursive functions. We only need
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 2:38 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
note that my definition of fitness also includes marketing forces and
economics.
for example, something can have be more fit because it has lots of money
invested into its marketing effort, ...
I objected specifically to your
16 matches
Mail list logo
