On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Instead of arguing language, why don't you argue platform?
Platform is certainly an interesting question. I take the view that Common Lisp has the advantage of allowing me to defer the choice of platform. You take the view that .Net has the advantage of allowing you to defer the choice of language, which is not unreasonable. As far as I know, there isn't a version of Common Lisp for .Net, but there is a Scheme, which would be suitable for writing things that the AI needs to understand, and still allow interoperability with other chunks of code written in C# or whatever. The obvious fly in the ointment is that a lot of technical work is done on Unix, so an AI project really wants to keep that option open if at all possible. Is Mono ready for prime time yet? > And as for Python? Great for getting reasonably small projects up quickly > and easily. The cost is trade-offs on extensibility and maintenance -- > which means that, for a large, complex system, some day you're either going > to rewrite and replace it (not necessarily a bad thing) or you're going to > rue the day that you used it. Why do you say that? Python code is concise and very readable, both of which are positive attributes for extensibility and maintenance. ------------------------------------------- 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
