On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 08:23:36AM -0700, Steve Richfield via AGI wrote: > APIs have a problem in AGI - they tend to be procedural. Down in the bowels > of a future AGI program there will doubtless be plenty of procedural code, > but at the higher levels "programming" will be more defining how (virtual) > things are put together - more like describing a block wiring diagram than > code. So, to avoid misleading acronyms, let's talk about ADIs instead of > APIs. > > Further, let's try and separate ourselves from whether these are subroutine > calls to set things up in tables, commands to an interpreter, or fodder for > some futuristic compiler. We should be MUCH more concerned with the > semantics of this, than with its syntax. >
hey, did you want to join the SPEL mailing list? I regularly ask for suggestions when implementing features. Now the parser/syntax is mostly complete, will be doing "semantics", of transforming the human expressions into javascript and xml, possibly some other languages also. > As I recall from long ago, there was a language that was created to define > complex wiring diagrams at the block level - APL, which was created by Gene > Amdahl to facilitate the design of the IBM-360 line of computers. APL fell > into disfavor because it used strange symbols, though many/most APL > programmers used macros to give the obscure symbols convenient English > names so they could avoid writing in Sanskrit. > > After the 360, APL enjoyed considerable use among those doing financial > modeling (a LOT like AGI, only with smarter "neurons"), but was eventually > superseded by various proprietary languages. > > DOES ANYONE HERE SPEAK APL WELL ENOUGH TO DISCUSS ITS POSSIBLE ADAPTATION > FOR AGI? > > Language aside, I wonder what goes on at the block level inside of Ben's > code? I suspect it is a bunch of blocks - some (like early visual layers) > being completely predefined, and other blocks being neural networks or > something related. There is (probably) a hand-coded control structure of > some sort. > > I would think we should start with what people like Ben are already doing, > and generalize from that to be able to define interconnected blocks with > enough variability to be able to BOTH do what present experimental code is > doing AND what systems of biological neurons are suspected of doing. > > Once we have isolated the functionality of the individual blocks from the > structure that tells them how to organize and how to interconnect, it will > become possible for AGI coding to be fully reusable in a world that > implements smarter blocks and smarter definitional systems. > > BEN AND OTHERS WRITING EXPERIMENTAL AGI CODE: HOW DO YOU DESCRIBE THE > STRUCTURE OF YOUR SYSTEMS? > > The above aside, I wonder what ELSE we should look at to further define > this conversation? > > Thoughts? > > Steve > > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/5037279-a88c7a6d > 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/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
