I can see your points, sometimes I forget how ambitious this project is... 
:)
I suppose you want to make the software do what you want by communicating 
with it in a natural language and extend its capabilities on its own if it 
cannot achieve something yet by learning.

On Friday, 28 July 2017 00:26:40 UTC+2, linas wrote:
>
> Hi Adrian. I think you missed my point. 
>
> The goal is to not write code at all, not in java, not in clojure, not in 
> scala, not in scheme, not in python and not in C++. The goal is to have the 
> machine write it's own code.  The language that the machine writes in is 
> atomese.
>
> Why atomese, and not java, clojure. scala, python, scheme c++? Because 
> atomese has been designed for introspection.  Tht is, it has been 
> intentionally designed to look like the intermediate language used in a 
> compiler, a lot like Gimple in GCC, or the IR in LLVM. The opencog atomese 
> intentionally looks like gimple and IR and intentionally does NOT look like 
> bytecode!
>
> Atomese has also been designed to resemble a relational algebra (aka SQL, 
> or the W3C html query languages). Also, atomese has been designed to be a 
> kind of KR language similar to famous old KR languages, such as prolog or 
> STRIPS.  Its done this way NOT FOR HUMANS, but to allow the machine to 
> introspect and manipulate structures.
>
> Atomese has also been designed to resemble a rule language, such as DROOLS.
>
> Stop thinking of programming languages that humans use. This is NOT ABOUT 
> HUMANS! Its not about the language that is easy for some human programmer 
> to use. If you are a human, scala and clojure are fun, but that is just not 
> what this is about.  We want less human-written code, not more.
>
> --linas
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Adrian Borucki <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> 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
>>>>  
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/0a580a06-c43a-487c-8a89-3d86b0ce537b%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> 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] <javascript:>.
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 
>> <javascript:>.
>> 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
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/9198c298-499c-4523-a97a-4b76a1f34551%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>> 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/e086490d-9b7f-4909-9eca-68d780998120%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to