On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Russell Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Vladimir Nesov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I'd write this specification in language it understands, including a >> library that builds more convenient primitives from that foundation if >> necessary. > > Okay, so you'd waste a lot of irreplaceable time creating a homebrew > language running on a slow interpreter stack when there are good > efficient languages already available. In other words, you'd make the > same mistake I did, and probably end up years down the line writing > posts on mailing lists to try to steer other people away from it :-) >
Again, specifics. What is this "specification" thing? What kind of task are to be specified in it? Where does it lead, where does it end? In the context of my general argument I don't assume that you'd have to write that much. If you have to write so much, that is a deviation from my default, and you'd need to explain it to connect to this argument. Basically, it's a tradeoff between adding complexity in a core AI algorithm and adding complexity in a message that AI mush handle, in which I'd prefer to keep the core simple. -- Vladimir Nesov [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://causalityrelay.wordpress.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
