I mean -- just making another scripting-language wrapper for Atomspace and associated cognitive-process interactions doesn't really accomplish anything, that's all...
Right now we have bindings in Scheme, pretty-thorough ones in python, very partial ones in Haskell ... but pretty much only the Scheme ones are used by anyone. I have been debating whether we should just deprecate the python and Haskell bindings... We also should introduce nicer ways for application developers to interface with OpenCog, but that can be via higher-level interfaces, not necessarily via low-level bindings to each Atomspace and cognitive-process function... If some particular useful extension to OpenCog would be most easily done via Java then, why not.... But just adding more languages for interfacing w/ OpenCog at a low level doesn't really advance things IMO.... The hard part of working with OpenCog is not learning Scheme or C++ ... -- Ben On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:02 AM, Adrian Borucki <[email protected]> wrote: > Using JVM stack has an advantage of being able to write code in Scala or > Clojure too. I guess Clojure would fit because Scheme is already being used. > It does have some differences though, so it wouldn't be a seamless > transition. > > On Wednesday, 26 July 2017 23:01:08 UTC+2, linas wrote: >> >> The prefered language is atomese. http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Atomese > > > The wiki mentions runtime efficiency problems of Atmospace - do you plan to > go for that Agda implementation or do you have something else planned? > >> >> >> scheme is there for accidental historical reasons, it just happens to be a >> really good fit for typed hypergraphs. Java is a terrible fit, it doesn't >> have this concept. Javascript feels like it might fit well. Python is >> awkward -- again, cause both python and java are procedural languages, not >> functional, and thus have no concept of hierarchy or recursion or any >> graph-like structure. >> >> The atomspace is defacto implemented in c++ partly for historical reasons, >> and partly because that provides OK performance. >> >> --linas >> >> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Ed Pell <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Yes! I love it when people give definite answers. >>> >>> So, just to check, the preferred language is Scheme? >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "opencog" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>> email to [email protected]. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/0a580a06-c43a-487c-8a89-3d86b0ce537b%40googlegroups.com. >>> >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "opencog" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/9198c298-499c-4523-a97a-4b76a1f34551%40googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Ben Goertzel, PhD http://goertzel.org "I am God! I am nothing, I'm play, I am freedom, I am life. I am the boundary, I am the peak." -- Alexander Scriabin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "opencog" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CACYTDBeRrrZgwEageRBoYTbP30uCu0js0y%3DiEdjN4AgVtAPiAQ%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
