Hi Nil,

Am Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2020 11:56:37 UTC+1 schrieb Nil:
>
> Hi Alex, 
>
> What do you get if you run the pattern matcher query 
>
> (GetLink 
>    (TypedVariableLink 
>      (VariableNode "person") 
>      (TypeNode "ConceptNode") 
>    ) 
>    (EvaluationLink 
>      (DefinedPredicateNode "is_tall_B") 
>      (VariableNode "person") 
>    ) 
> ) 
>
> instead of calling the backward chainer? 
>

it worked in the pattern matcher.

 

>
> On 5/6/20 1:31 PM, Alexander Gabriel wrote: 
> > # I patched the URE logger to use the standard logger instance, you're 
> > unlikely to get ure debug ouptput if you run the code. 
>
> Since you've managed to hack the ure logger, do you think you could add 
> python binding for it? 
>

Well, it was a one line change that made the whole ure logger code 
irrelevant because it just returns the standard logger whenever a logger is 
called for. I didn't see a reason to have two loggers.
Regarding the python bindings, my knowledge regarding cython is really 
limited, but I guess you could just use the python logger code from the 
main project...I looked at it but didn't find the details of how it is 
used....and the debug output from that part of the code is quite limited 
(to scheme parsing as far as I can see).

 

>
> That would be really awesome. I would do it but I know nothing about 
> python bindings, I'm already overflown and don't use Python. A ure log 
> binding would allow me to more easily assist ure python users (and maybe 
> even switch to it, if mature enough). 
>
> Nil 
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/79630365-1c38-4524-93d2-a5ca84d58279%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to