On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 9:00 AM, Nil Geisweiller <[email protected]>
wrote:

>  I mean when run by cog-execute!, which also happens to be the standard
way of invoking the pattern matcher.


Any atom type that derives from FunctionLink has the C++ method

    virtual Handle execute() const;

method on it ... which cog-execute! calls. This typically triggers a long
chain-reaction of executions (because its recursive ... there's even a way
of doing infinite recursion with it, and starting/stopping/joining threads
with it... in pure atomese. There are Atoms that create threads and join
them. This is why Atomese is a "programming language" - it supports
recursion etc.).  Note that this method returns an Atom.

There used to be a cog-evaluate! that was similar but returned a
TruthValue.   I do not recall if we removed it or not; if it still exists,
then it is not widely used.

It is possible that we might someday need to introduce some kind of
cog-valuate! method that returns a value, but otherwise works much like
cog-execute!  However, I am extremely super-nervous about having such a
conversation right now. I think the newcomers need to have another
half-year-ish of hands-on experience before we debate such fairly
significant architectural changes.  It's very important that everyone
understand the current architecture, before we just start changing it.

The existing architecture has room for a lot of things, a lot of freedom
for designing things. I'd like to stick to it as much as possible.

Linas

-- 
cassette tapes - analog TV - film cameras - you

-- 
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/CAHrUA37-y9gbEr1mUY0JE_paNF8oK99UWgsCBqi5jX-M6kfK6w%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to