Bro, do you even Haskell? :) https://www.facebook.com/notes/juan-carlos-kuri-pinto/how-to-program-stateful-intertwined-ai-networks-graphs-in-stateless-modular-prog/10151687175972712
http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/261007/a-z_programming_languages_haskell/ On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 2:01 AM, Steve Richfield <[email protected]> wrote: > Mike, > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Mike Archbold <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> This is a great classic book on programming languages, the Programming >> Language Landscape. >> >> >> http://www.amazon.com/Programming-Language-Landscape-Semantics-Implementation/dp/0023758716/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1438630302&sr=8-1&keywords=programming+language+landscape >> >> My favorite chapter is "The Swamp of Complexity." In a nutshell -- >> too many languages with too much crap in them! > > > The author completely missed the REAL problem with language complexity - > that when it becomes necessary to radically alter the execution, e.g. > vectorize the program to run on a supercomputer, then the size of the > compiler grows as the SQUARE of the size of the language (actually, > n*(n-1)/2, the number of interactions of components). Where more than two > elements must be considered together, there is often a cubic component that > can swamp even the quadratic component. If you have twice the language > complexity, it takes four (or eight) times as much compiler code to compile > it to a radically different architecture than that of the language. THAT is > why so many supercomputers start out with APL and FORTRAN compilers, and > why C compilers only vectorize simple loops that utilize a small subset of > the language. > > Of course, having lots of cute statements that all translate to arithmetic > and IF statements don't affect the compiler complexity much at all. > > Unfortunately, this book never considered truly parallel implementations, > where everything runs at once - but rather they considered "parallel" > programming to be simple multi-threaded programing. > > Indeed, on page 6 they list "the" dozen classes of computer languages, > none of which come close to what I am trying to create. > > Still - I got my dollar's worth. > > Thanks. > Steve > ================ > >> It looks like you can >> get a copy for less than a buck.... >> Mike A >> >> >> On 8/3/15, Steve Richfield <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > I am working on a high-level FPGA programming language, that should also >> > serve better than existing languages as an AGI implementation language >> and >> > a robotics programming language. This is designed to be executed on >> FPGAs >> > rather than CPUs, though a PC version is contemplated. >> > >> > Here are my early thoughts. All comments are welcome. >> > >> > Parallel Computing Language >> > *Design Notes by Steve Richfield *as of Aug 2, 2015 >> > >> > The goal of PCL is to provide a language to express algorithms in >> parallel >> > form for easy compilation to either parallel or sequential platforms, >> > rather than forcing programmers to express their algorithms in a >> probably >> > inefficient sequential form, for a (nonexistent) compiler to translate >> to a >> > parallel form. >> > >> > >> > The special need is to be able to translate to FPGA implementations, >> which >> > presently require efficient translation to be able to fit into existing >> > hardware. >> > >> > >> > *Existing Technology from which to Borrow* >> > >> > *APL structure:* In APL, everything is a matrix of varying >> dimensionality, >> > including zero dimensions (a simple variable). It includes numerous >> array >> > operations as operators in the language. Unfortunately, its promoters >> have >> > adopted syntax reminiscent to Sanskrit, which is enough to chase away >> > anyone not well versed in matrix inversions, etc. Some of the IBM-360 >> > architecture was first worked out in APL. >> > >> > >> > *Dartmouth BASIC MAT statements: *The original Dartmouth BASIC >> recognized >> > MAT at the beginning of statements to indicate that the statements >> > specified matrix operations, rather than operations on variables. Hence, >> > *MAT >> > C=A*B* multiplied matrix *A* by matrix *B*, and stored the result in >> matrix >> > *C*. APL-like procedure is MUCH less opaque in this syntax. >> > >> > >> > *COBOL PICTURE clauses:* COBOL provided an easy (though now arcane) way >> of >> > easily describing variable structure, which could be easily extended to >> > meet present needs. Specifying *PICTURE 9999*, which could be >> abbreviated >> > *PIC >> > 9(4)*, a programmer could easily state that a variable had to hold 4 >> > decimal digit values. In our implementation, *PICTURE 111111111111* or >> *PIC >> > 1(12)* could specify a 12-bit field, as could *PICTURE 7777* or *PICTURE >> > FFF*. COBOL also allowed for fixed-point notation, which is also >> important >> > in FPGA context, e.g. with *PICTURE 999V99* to represent 3 digits to the >> > left and two digits to the right of the implied decimal point. Provision >> > would have to also be made for logarithmic notation. Note that in >> addition >> > to precisely specifying “variables”, this also guides debuggers on how >> to >> > display what they find. This approach would allow for specifying >> pipeline >> > widths to be as narrow as possible for each operation. >> > >> > >> > *FORTRAN Arithmetic Statement Functions:* FORTRAN provides a one-line >> way >> > of specifying simple function subroutines, e.g. >> > *RMS(A,B)=SQRT((A**2)+(B**2))* that are usually implemented by simple >> > string substitution into their references, so they are executed as an >> > in-line subroutine in C, but without the need to specify they are >> in-line. >> > Data chaining in complex operations would be easy to specify with such >> > syntax. >> > >> > >> > *Eliminating **GOTO** statements: *Parallel processing aside, there are >> > plenty of good reasons to eliminate *GOTO* statements. In the process, >> we >> > should probably eliminate everything else that specifies anything >> > conditional beyond conditional storage of computed results. The >> presence of >> > a particular condition that necessitates particular processing should be >> > handled as an event, though it would be possible to fake it by >> translating >> > conditional logic into an event handler. >> > >> > >> > *All “procedure” will be event-driven:* Where sequence is needed, it >> will >> > be triggered step-by-step, e.g. by *WHEN* statements. Where a long >> sequence >> > is needed, each step must be triggered by completing the previous step. >> To >> > avoid programming flags and *WHEN* clauses for each step, a *PROCEDURE* >> > will be declared, that necessarily starts with a *WHEN* clause, after >> which >> > the compiler will assume that each step starts when the previous step >> has >> > completed. There may be any number of procedures simultaneously active >> at >> > any one time, but only one instance of any particular procedure, unless >> it >> > is declared as being *RECURSIVE* and/or *REENTRANT*. Where a procedure >> > requires conditional operation within it, the conditional operation >> will be >> > triggered and entered via a *WHEN* statement. Note that complex *WHEN* >> > statements, when implemented in hardware, only cost gates and NOT any >> time. >> > >> > >> > *Familiar Operations: *Familiar operations like SELECT ... CASE >> statements >> > will be provided, though they will “execute” in unfamiliar ways. For >> > example, a SELECT statement will simultaneously “execute” all CASEs for >> > which the stated conditions are satisfied. >> > >> > >> > *Syntax:* Three different syntaxes will be supported, which can be >> > intermixed on input. They are mathematical, familiar (similar to C), and >> > verbose (similar to COBOL). For example, familiar *MAT C=A*B *in the >> > example above would be simply *C=A*B* in mathematical form, and >> *Multiply >> > matrix A by matrix B giving matrix C* in verbose form. Error messages >> from >> > the compiler would show both the input and the equivalent verbose >> forms, to >> > show how the compiler interpreted the statements. >> > >> > >> > *Early implementations:* Initially this PCL will be a publication >> language >> > to specify the construction of complex programmable logic. Then, a >> > translator will be written in a portable language like C to translate >> > programs from PCL to C so that programs can be tested on personal >> > computers, etc. Then, translators will be written to translate to FPGAs >> > programming languages *Verilog* and *VHDL*, and finally, FPGAs will be >> > adapted to become better targets for code produced by this process, >> much as >> > IBM 360/370 mainframes were designed as prime targets for COBOL >> programs. >> > >> > >> > *Other Applications:* This language comes VERY close to also meeting the >> > needs for robotics applications, with many simultaneous tasks and close >> > coupling to I/O, so it should be expanded to include anything that >> might be >> > missing to also serve robotics. >> > >> > >> > *Comments:* PLEASE comment on this at any level, most especially what >> > other languages might serve this need, what features of other languages >> > should be incorporated, what it might be missing, what might be wrong, >> etc. >> > >> > >> > Steve >> > >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------- >> > AGI >> > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >> > RSS Feed: >> https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11943661-d9279dae >> > 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/303/10443978-6f4c28ac >> Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; >> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com >> > > > > -- > Full employment can be had with the stoke of a pen. Simply institute a six > hour workday. That will easily create enough new jobs to bring back full > employment. > > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/23601136-e0982844> | > Modify > <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> > Your Subscription <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
