I agree ... > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of J. Andrew Rogers > Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 1:55 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [agi] Sensory Front-End: which API? > > > > I forgot to ask: what would be a good programming interface to > > use? I mean for the visual module to communicate with the AGI > > module? > > > A protocol specification would probably be the best choice, followed by > a C language lib implementation of said protocol. It is relatively > simple to bind C libs into just about any environment that you care to > e.g. into Python, C#, and similar. Very portable. > > > > I can code in Visual C++ or C#, but I want to make the frontend > > the easiest to integrate with other programs (mainly for Windows). > > I think Linux and others will be handled separately. > > > Hmmm... With one notable exception that I can think of, I believe most > AGI folks are using a Linux (or mostly compatible) environment to run > their systems on and I would recommend something that plays well with > the standard Unix tool chain. > > AGI is a "big system" problem, and Linux is many years ahead of Windows > in its ability to scale well to very large shared memory and clustered > systems. Linux also has a fairly mature tool chain that is already > well-adapted to massive systems. That it is increasingly the de facto > operating system for supercomputing, both shared memory (a la Cray) and > clustered (a la Beowulf), there is quite a bit of momentum that probably > shouldn't be ignored. > > I actually do most of my code hacking and testing on MacOS X, but for > "real" work the systems are Linux because it emerges as the clear choice > once scalability and performance becomes an issue, mostly because it is > the primary (and usually best) choice on larger hardware. And because > MacOS X uses a Unix tool chain, the environment tends to be very > portable. I think most serious AGI projects would have a hard time > using anything that requires a Windows tool chain, because most only use > a Unix tool chain for a lot of good reasons. If you want the code to be > usable among a large number of projects, this is a serious consideration. > > Which is why I suggested C and bindings... > > > j. andrew rogers > > > ------- > To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate > your subscription, > please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
