Yes, go for it!
Are you going to try and translate Fortran or C to PicoLisp, or are you
going full hog, and try to implement from scratch?

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 7:17 PM, Manuel Cano <> wrote:

> If you can choose, I don't know what are you waiting for... have fun!
> 2015-07-20 13:03 GMT+02:00 Amaury Hernández Águila <>:
>> Not using BLAS or LAPACK.
>> 2015-07-20 3:53 GMT-07:00 Manuel Cano <>:
>>> What gives you more fun?
>>> 2015-07-20 12:18 GMT+02:00 Amaury Hernández Águila <>:
>>>> I appreciate people who know the term "computational intelligence."
>>>> PicoCI sounds good.
>>>> I know that BLAS and LAPACK are battle-tested, but in that case I would
>>>> just use other libraries in other programming languages (this is how I
>>>> feel). I've been doing CI in common lisp using clml, mgl-gpr, mgl, and
>>>> others, and I even have access to run my models in CUDA GPUs with my
>>>> current setup. I'd like to see PilOS running CI in a near future, and
>>>> without the dependencies on fortran's BLAS and LAPACK.
>>>> I'm still open to constructive criticism. Should we take a purist
>>>> approach or should we go the battle-tested safer route?
>>>> 2015-07-20 2:32 GMT-07:00 Robert Herman <>:
>>>>> I would welcome the results of your efforts, and contribute where I
>>>>> could, but I think it would be best to make calls to BLAS and LAPACK, 
>>>>> since
>>>>> they are battle-tested. I am currently working my way through a book
>>>>> 'Handbook of Neuroevolution through Erlang', but I prefer Lisp. Erlang is
>>>>> just better at the fault tolerance, distributed thing.
>>>>> Lush2 Lisp was used for heavy numerics, so you may want to look there
>>>>> for some guidance, however the Sourceforge site is down at the moment

Reply via email to