well, I was referred here by someone I know, and it seems like it it may be
possible to have interesting conversations...
granted, I am not so fammiliar at present with either this group or what
everyone here is trying to accomplish.
I was given a little doubt though by the initial
I don't know what the point of this is, but oh well...
(personally, the idea seems a little silly, and the context seems to not make a
whole lot of sense, but oh well...).
but, in any case, one can easily enough track function calls in a manner
similar to a profiler, where each time a
or:
one could produce the code to be run as specialized zip files, filled with
some-odd Java class files, and any data files;
the zip file is recieved, unpacked into a local directory, then executed with a
specialized/modified Java VM (mostly modified to keep track of what things are
run);
any
- Original Message -
From: Michael FIG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Fundamentals of New Computing fonc@vpri.org
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 2:32 PM
Subject: Re: [fonc]( picoVerse-:( LambdaLisp Assembler needs testing ) )
Kjell Godo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Currency ? ! -- Now let's
- Original Message -
From: John Leuner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Fundamentals of New Computing fonc@vpri.org
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: [fonc] greetings: new here...
more so, not only is this codebase written in C, but it also compiles C,
and
links the newly
dunno if this is the kind of thing that is on-topic/of-interest here, I will
see...
figured I would include it (this being from an email to someone I know):
---
did start a little bit implementing some of the things I mentioned a
few days ago (restructuring the MI mechanism, making
well, in writing this I will at least try to organize my thoughts, and speak
more of general ideas than implementation details (granted, I am far
more inclined towards the latter than the former).
I will allow that probably many of those here will strongly disagree with
all I have to say, but
- Original Message -
From: Aaron Gray [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Fundamentals of New Computing fonc@vpri.org
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 2:53 AM
Subject: Re: [fonc] x86_64...
apparently both this, and my effort, had independently discovered the
idea of having 2 different this/self
well, my last comment may have been a little harsh on register VMs.
so, on each side there are costs and gains.
for this, I will focus on interpreters, since this is the main area where
the debate is relevant.
stack VM, pros:
typically very simple to target;
instruction stream is usually
for the people here in this group:
what are your opinions of .NET?
what of open-source alternatives, such as Mono and Portable.NET / dotGNU?
what of the Java VM?
what about LLVM and like?
or, maybe, the AVM2 / Tamarin?
..
what of the relative merits and detractors between them?
what particular
(sorry if similar is already in use...).
like having documentation in a hypertext form, and having code contain links
into the docs, and from the docs back into the code?...
markup could be done similar to a wiki, and the editor can interpret comments
containing wiki-links as linking elsewhere
- Original Message -
From: John Nilsson
To: Fundamentals of New Computing
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: [fonc] Program representation
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:29 PM, BGB cr88...@hotmail.com wrote:
like having documentation in a hypertext form
can't say exactly...
but, before I wrote an interpreter for x86 (basically, like an emulator, but
it doesn't bother with faking the entire system).
but, in this case, I had basically used some logic from an assembler of mine
to essentially disassemble the machine code into a higher-level
my effort had not gone nearly so high up the abstraction tree, but instead
operated in a space more like an abstracted x86 machine.
moving to a much higher level model, such as that of GCC IR or LLVM IR,
would likely be difficult to pull off effectively starting from real
machine code, such
(pardon the top-post)
granted, I probably don't speak for others here, who may have differing
opinions, I just speak for myself...
I am not formally involved with the project in question here, but work on
some of my own stuff in a similar domain (VM and compiler technology).
well, that is
- Original Message -
From: John Zabroski
To: Fundamentals of New Computing
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 8:44 AM
Subject: Re: [fonc] goals
I personally do not believe technology actually improves lives. Usually, it
is the opposite. Technology creates instant
- Original Message -
From: Julian Leviston jul...@leviston.net
To: Fundamentals of New Computing fonc@vpri.org
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: [fonc] goals
On 09/07/2010, at 1:44 AM, John Zabroski wrote:
I personally do not believe technology actually improves
(pardon this thread's continued existence...).
well, each generation has to have come from somewhere...
but, yeah (prior to the big ethics issue), the general point I tried to make
is that it is generally much more a matter of pragmatics (what people can
get from technology or use it to
much agreed.
pardon my likely inelegant extension:
seemingly, nearly any problem can be abstracted, and a set of more elegant
solutions can be devised to long-standing problems.
for example, to abstract over the HW, there was the CPU instruction set;
to abstract over the instruction set,
yeah.
I guess a lot depends on other factors though.
for example, is a lot of this added code because:
the programmer has little idea what he was doing, and so just wildly
copy-pasted everywhere and made a big mess?...
has lots of code which is actually beneficial, such as doing error checking
yes.
there is much emphasis on people understanding an entire system, whereas often
a programmer does not need to have such comprehensive understanding.
in a large codebase, for example, parts of the project will come into view as
one works on them, and when one moves elsewhere they may pass
- Original Message -
From: K. K. Subramaniam subb...@gmail.com
To: fonc@vpri.org
Cc: BGB cr88...@hotmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 9:47 PM
Subject: Re: [fonc] goals
On Wednesday 14 Jul 2010 9:25:11 am BGB wrote:
there is much emphasis on people understanding an entire system
I think it is mostly because the internet is composed of well-defined /
agreed-upon protocols and data formats.
each part is largely decoupled from the others. it sends and accepts data, and
it responds to whatever is happening.
often, the protocols are very much layered, with most layers not
- Original Message -
From: Waldemar Kornewald wkornew...@freenet.de
To: Fundamentals of New Computing fonc@vpri.org
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [fonc] On inventing the computing microscope/telescope for
thedynamic semantic web
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 8:28
- Original Message -
From: Julian Leviston jul...@leviston.net
To: Fundamentals of New Computing fonc@vpri.org
Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2010 10:21 AM
Subject: [fonc] Spec-Driven Self-Testing Code
--
Does anyone know about a language (possibly something in smalltalk) that
involves
- Original Message -
From: Julian Leviston jul...@leviston.net
To: Fundamentals of New Computing fonc@vpri.org
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [fonc] Spec-Driven Self-Testing Code
On 11/10/2010, at 12:24 PM, BGB wrote:
--
Does anyone know about a language
Original Message
Subject:Re: [fonc] Software and Motivation
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 04:01:22 -0700
From: BGB cr88...@gmail.com
To: Fundamentals of New Computing fonc@vpri.org
CC: David Harris dphar...@telus.net
On 2/19/2011 1:06 AM, David Harris wrote
On 5/16/2011 9:22 PM, Ian Piumarta wrote:
Dear Josh,
Thanks for posting this!
Thought you guys would get a kick out of this YAML-WAV sequencer written in
Ruby:
https://github.com/jstrait/beats
I think this is pretty cool. (It puts us well on the way to archiving the
entire output of
On 5/27/2011 4:29 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:
snip...
coming out of lurk mode for the moment (well, also no-one has really
been talking to me recently either...)
[Wireworld Computer]
It is very cute. The circuit style of the Wireworld might actually be
the way of the future if quantum
On 6/3/2011 8:37 PM, Scott McLoughlin wrote:
For many, many moons, I've examined the early Smalltalk
books, small bootstrap Forth systems, Lisp based systems
(implementing a large subset of CL decades ago) and the like.
In recent years, I've taken an interest in type systems and
typed
On 6/5/2011 4:48 PM, Steve Wart wrote:
I like both Smalltalk and APL. I disagree with the assumption that
operator precedence is a big hurdle for people learning Smalltalk. At
least I find mathematical expressions in Smalltalk to be clearer than
their counterparts in Lisp. I like the following
On 6/5/2011 7:06 PM, David Leibs wrote:
I love APL! Learning APL is really all about learning the idioms and
how to apply them. This takes quite a lot of training time. Doing
this kind of training will change the way you think.
Alan Perlis quote: A language that doesn't affect the way
On 6/6/2011 12:18 AM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
Below:)
On Jun 5, 2011, at 11:19 PM, C. Scott Ananiancsc...@laptop.org wrote:
I explored this idea a bit once upon a time in the context of Java:
http://cscott.net/Publications/design.pdf
The bibliography cites most of the related work I know
of little things (implementing stuff, thinking oh well,
this would be nifty...) happens to allow a few C-like constructions to
be written.
also:
buf=new char[256];
str=Hello;
t=buf; s=str;
while(*t++=*s++);
funny how this works sometimes...
or such...
On Jun 5, 2011, at 11:55 PM, BGB cr88
On 6/6/2011 6:05 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Julian Leviston jul...@leviston.net
mailto:jul...@leviston.net wrote:
Is a language I program in necessarily limiting in its expressibility?
Yes. All communication architectures are necessarily limiting in
On 6/8/2011 9:20 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Tanks everyone for answering on this so much...
Comment/Question below,
On 09/06/2011, at 4:56 AM, Kevin Jones wrote:
I really don't understand what this means:
typedef struct object *(*method_t)(struct object *receiver, ...);
method_t is a
On 6/8/2011 10:03 PM, Josh Gargus wrote:
Looks like you beat me to the punch on my last email...
On Jun 8, 2011, at 9:39 PM, BGB wrote:
apparently, some people don't like using typedef for some reason I am
not entirely sure of...
According to wikipedia
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
On 6/8/2011 11:36 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Answering my own question...
On 09/06/2011, at 4:27 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
See below...
On 09/06/2011, at 2:59 PM, Josh Gargus wrote:
I really don't understand what this means:
typedef struct object *(*method_t)(struct object *receiver,
On 6/9/2011 12:56 AM, Josh Gargus wrote:
On May 31, 2011, at 7:30 AM, Alan Kay wrote:
Hi Cornelius
There are lots of egregiously wrong things in the web design. Perhaps
one of the simplest is that the browser folks have lacked the
perspective to see that the browser is not like an
On 6/9/2011 12:20 PM, Josh Gargus wrote:
On Jun 9, 2011, at 12:06 PM, BGB wrote:
On 6/9/2011 11:10 AM, Josh Gargus wrote:
That all sounds very cool.
However, I don't think that it's feasible to try to ship something like this as
standard in all browsers, if only for political reasons
On 6/10/2011 7:33 AM, Chris Warburton wrote:
On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 11:42 -0700, BGB wrote:
interesting...
less painfully slow than I would have expected from the description...
I wasn't thinking exactly like run an emulator, run OS in emulator,
but more like, a browser plugin which looked
On 6/10/2011 10:24 AM, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
On Jun 9, 2011, at 5:58 AM, Julian Levistonjul...@leviston.net wrote:
On 09/06/2011, at 7:04 PM, BGB wrote:
actually, possibly a relevant question here, would be why Java applets largely fell on
their face, but Flash largely took off (in all its
(sorry, I don't know if this belongs on-list or not...).
On 6/10/2011 1:44 PM, Max OrHai wrote:
Well, INTP here, so at least we have /some/ common ground.
yeah... I think I generally get along well enough with most people, in
general...
well, except Q's, which are basically people who
On 6/11/2011 6:30 PM, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 1:40 AM, BGBcr88...@gmail.com wrote:
The responsiveness of exploratory programming environments (such as the
Smalltalk programming environment) allows the programmer to concentrate on
the task at hand rather than being
On 6/13/2011 1:33 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 12/06/2011, at 1:00 PM, BGB wrote:
image-based systems have their own sets of drawbacks though...
dynamic reload could be a good enough compromise IMO, if done well...
I don't follow this train of thought. Everything runs in an image. That's
On 6/13/2011 3:19 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 13/06/2011, at 7:50 PM, BGB wrote:
On 6/13/2011 1:33 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 12/06/2011, at 1:00 PM, BGB wrote:
image-based systems have their own sets of drawbacks though...
dynamic reload could be a good enough compromise IMO
On 6/13/2011 8:39 PM, Yoshiki Ohshima wrote:
At Mon, 13 Jun 2011 17:16:10 -0400,
C. Scott Ananian wrote:
given that most non-Chinese can't read Chinese writing, despite that many of
these characters do actually resemble crude line-art drawings of various
things and ideas.
It is a common
On 6/13/2011 8:09 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 14/06/2011, at 7:33 AM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
Kids may not have the linguistic development out of the way that one needs to do
serious programming. Adults who don't already code may find themselves short
on some of the core concepts that
-by-reference, ...).
or such...
Sent from my phone
Den 15 jun 2011 01:08 skrev BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com:
On 6/14/2011 2:31 PM, John Nilsson wrote:
On both questions the answer is basically that Java was an example. I
was looking for a general solution. Something
On 6/14/2011 9:50 PM, Dethe Elza wrote:
On 2011-06-14, at 9:36 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
The thing that irritates me about this attitude of don't consider kids as equal is that
we DO consider them as equal in other frames... we expect so much of them in terms of linguistic
and cognitive
On 6/15/2011 9:06 AM, Dethe Elza wrote:
On 2011-06-15, at 8:55 AM, Ian Piumarta wrote:
If a wiki is the kind of database you had in mind, please feel free to make
use of:
http://vpri.org/fonc_wiki
Thanks for setting this up, Ian. When I go to Log in/ create account I don't
see any way to
On 6/16/2011 8:43 AM, Frederick Grose wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:34 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/15/2011 8:04 PM, BGB wrote:
On 6/15/2011 3:22 PM, Ian Piumarta wrote:
On Jun 15, 2011, at 14:09 , BGB wrote
On 6/17/2011 11:37 AM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
On Jun 15, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Ian Piumartapiuma...@speakeasy.net wrote:
Invention receives no attention, and innovation (even when incorrectly
understood) receives lip service in the press, but no current-day vehicle
exists to to nurture it.
On 6/16/2011 8:43 AM, Frederick Grose wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:34 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/15/2011 8:04 PM, BGB wrote:
On 6/15/2011 3:22 PM, Ian Piumarta wrote:
On Jun 15, 2011, at 14:09 , BGB wrote
On 6/18/2011 1:05 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
I'm asking myself how relevant the projects I hack on are in this
context. Others probably are too. Of the stuff that didn't disappear
into the commercial void, recently it's been mostly Smalltalk for me,
and FONC is not about Smalltalk; Smalltalk
On 6/19/2011 7:20 PM, Steve Dekorte wrote:
On 2011-06-14 Tue, at 09:36 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
The thing that irritates me about this attitude of don't consider kids as equal is that
we DO consider them as equal in other frames... we expect so much of them in terms of linguistic
and
On 6/19/2011 9:49 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 20/06/2011, at 2:33 PM, BGB wrote:
in a sense, the metaphor no longer works, and should likely itself be left to
fall into the recycle-bin of history. worse yet is having to read stuff written
by people who actually take this metaphor seriously
On 6/19/2011 11:54 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 20/06/2011, at 4:33 PM, BGB wrote:
interestingly, I don't believe in getting rid of the file-system, per-se, as
technically it works fairly well and is a proven piece of technology.
Interestingly, I disagree entirely. Finding things is a pain
On 6/19/2011 11:58 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 20/06/2011, at 4:33 PM, BGB wrote:
For example, when web programming on a specific web app, I use a web browser, a text editor, a database
management program, a command line, and a couple other tools. It'd be nice to be able to fit these
tools
On 6/20/2011 2:19 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 20/06/2011, at 6:33 PM, BGB wrote:
I am not certain I follow how this would get rid of file-systems though...
I am not aware of any good alternative to the filesystem which is generally
better than the filesystem (can effectively manage huge
On 6/20/2011 3:22 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 20/06/2011, at 8:06 PM, BGB wrote:
hmm... S-Expression database?...
sort of like a hybrid between a database and a persistent store.
or such...
I'd like to know if you think there's a difference between a filesystem and a
database
On 6/20/2011 9:19 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Hi... (see below)...
On 21/06/2011, at 3:42 AM, BGB wrote:
On 6/20/2011 3:22 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 20/06/2011, at 8:06 PM, BGB wrote:
hmm... S-Expression database?...
sort of like a hybrid between a database and a persistent store
On 6/22/2011 5:08 PM, Steve Wart wrote:
Still, databases and file systems are both based on concepts that
predate electronic computers.
When Windows and Macs came along the document metaphor became
prevalent, but in practice this was always just a user friendly name
for a file. The layers and
On 6/22/2011 2:45 PM, Steve Dekorte wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nii1n8PYLrc
Thoughts?
interesting, but wasn't so fond of the music or graphics or skits...
a bit much like something from the 70s...
also, although mainstream languages aren't necessarily all that
On 6/24/2011 9:07 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 24/06/2011, at 11:42 PM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
They gave that presentation more than once (I saw it a OOPSLA).
Awesome :)
Here's a version from JAOO'08, streams fine in Germany:
On 6/25/2011 3:27 AM, Bob Arning wrote:
I concur. It was mildly entertaining at points, but mostly I kept
hoping they would speed up the pace while slowing down the camera
switching. Since some smart people recommended it, I kept plugging
away. I got a bit over half way before bailing.
I
well, here is my thing:
I mostly develop on x86 (and x86-64), and so most of my code is targeted
to this target.
recently, I figured I would try to port some of my stuff to ARM, mostly
as a matter of personal experience and seeing if I could. I started with
my assembler here (it is a major
On 7/9/2011 5:07 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:
BGB,
or, maybe all my x86 experience blinds me some to the elegance of
ARM's ISA?...
whatever is so great about it, well, I am not seeing it at this level.
why then do so many people seem to complain that the x86 ISA is so
horrible?...
I think
On 7/17/2011 2:33 PM, Craig Latta wrote:
That talk would have been a whole lot better if he had grounded it
with a discussion of how constraints are good for creativity. It's how
he should have spent the time where he went on about memorizing Pi for
no good reason...
if memorizing pie is
On 7/17/2011 2:46 PM, David Leibs wrote:
I couldn't handle his condescending attitude towards goto statements.
I might not use them very often but when you need one there is nothing better.
generally agreed...
it is not for no reason that languages like C# still have them, despite
being
On 7/17/2011 3:39 PM, Derek Kulinski wrote:
Hello BGB,
Sunday, July 17, 2011, 2:51:40 PM, you wrote:
for example, if/while/for/... don't mean goto shouldn't exist in a
language or should be branded as evil as a result, rather they provide
better alternatives such that things like goto
On 7/17/2011 5:18 PM, Karl Robillard wrote:
Heh... that talk didn't recieve a very warm welcome over at Lambda the
Ultimate either. My favorite comment was the idea that AI could advance to
the point where the final programming language may end up being English. I
guess that means programmers
On 7/19/2011 8:24 AM, Ondřej Bílka wrote:
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 05:16:24AM -0700, Casey Ransberger wrote:
Even if it were possible to have a last language, it would be double plus
ungood.
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Paul Homer[1]paul_ho...@yahoo.ca
wrote:
Realistically,
On 7/22/2011 6:41 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
I did this dance too... Hmm... Seems the Mac installer comes with some
kind of translation tool that's advertised to be able to output MPEG,
maybe we can use that to save others the trouble of installing the
Real client.
yeah...
even on
On 7/23/2011 2:10 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
Drat. Tried to convert this, but I just get a dialog that says
convert only works from a local file. I don't see an option to pull
the actual video file down, and IIRC .ram files are like trackers that
point at a stream rather than being the actual
On 7/25/2011 12:59 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Igor Stasenko siguc...@gmail.com
mailto:siguc...@gmail.com wrote:
how different our systems would be, if guys who started it 20
years back would think a bit about future?
The guys who spend their time
On 7/25/2011 4:28 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 3:20 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
too bad there is no standardized bytecode or anything though, but
then I guess it would at this point be more like
browser-integrated Flash or something
On 7/26/2011 5:34 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
On 26 July 2011 05:21, Alan Kayalan.n...@yahoo.com wrote:
Again good points.
Java itself could have been fixed if it were not for the Sun marketing
people who rushed the electronic toaster language out where it was not fit
to go. Sun was filled with
On 7/26/2011 6:43 AM, John Nilsson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 8:16 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
the main merit of a bytecode format is that it could shorten the
path in getting to native code, potentially allowing it to be faster.
It seems to me
On 7/26/2011 9:05 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 1:50 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
whether or not compiling to bytecode is itself an actually
effective security measure, it is the commonly expected security
measure.
Is it? I've
On 7/26/2011 8:34 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 3:28 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
why do we need an HLL distribution language, rather than, say, a
low-level distribution language, such as bytecode or a VM-level
ASM-like format
On 7/27/2011 2:12 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 11:14 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
one can support ifdef blocks in the IL, no real problem there.
Those seem like a problem all by themselves. Definitions are
inflexible, lacking in domain
On 7/27/2011 6:37 AM, David Goehrig wrote:
On Jul 26, 2011, at 8:45 PM, Casey Ransberger
casey.obrie...@gmail.com mailto:casey.obrie...@gmail.com wrote:
Worth pointing out that server side JS dodges this problem. Now
that Node is out there, people are actually starting to do stuff with
On 7/27/2011 9:35 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 3:41 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
a non-turing-complete IL is too limited to do much of anything
useful with WRT developing actual software...
You aren't alone in holding this uninformed
On 7/27/2011 1:52 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:40 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
I think fitness and merit are some often misunderstood ideas.
People understand just fine that a solution of technical merit can
fail due to market forces
On 7/28/2011 9:57 AM, Alan Kay wrote:
Well, we don't absolutely *need* music notation, but it really helps
many things. We don't *need* the various notations of mathematics
(check out Newton's use of English for complex mathematical
relationships in the Principia), but it really helps things.
On 7/28/2011 8:19 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 2:16 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
striving for simplicity can also help, but even simplicity can
have costs:
sometimes, simplicity in one place may lead to much higher complexity
On 7/29/2011 1:05 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:12 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
snip...
nothing interesting to comment/add...
Snow Crash: dot pattern from space - brain-damage
Ah, yes, that wasn't the bit I wanted to create from
On 7/29/2011 7:06 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 5:08 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
Linden Labs tried to do similar with Second Life, but it hasn't
really caught on very well in-general.
however, most prior attempts: VRML, Adobe
On 8/1/2011 3:24 PM, Simon Forman wrote:
On 7/27/11, Chris Warburtonchriswa...@googlemail.com wrote:
snip
(maybe relevant but no really to comment).
Another reason I would argue against something like types based on
Physics is that Physics tries to work out the inconceivable ways that
the
On 8/3/2011 7:32 AM, Chris Warburton wrote:
On Tuesday 02 August 2011 00:43:57 BGB wrote:
On 8/1/2011 3:24 PM, Simon Forman wrote:
On 7/27/11, Chris Warburtonchriswa...@googlemail.com wrote:
snip
(maybe relevant but no really to comment).
Another reason I would argue against something
sorry, just trying to clarify a few points...
On 8/3/2011 9:57 AM, BGB wrote:
in my own language, there is the async modifier which can
(theoretically) be used for a lot of this:
async function foo(x, y) { ... }
where calls to foo implicitly create their own thread.
async bar(x, 3);
would
On 8/3/2011 1:04 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
On 3 August 2011 21:04, BGBcr88...@gmail.com wrote:
sorry, just trying to clarify a few points...
...
sadly, the async modifier was used in the first incarnation of BGBScript
(2004-2006), but was never fully reimplemented when the language was
On 8/4/2011 1:06 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 12:10 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
The new thread should inherit the entire dynamic scope -
logically, a local copy thereof. If there are object
references mixed
On 8/4/2011 7:55 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:53 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
if the parent thread sees its thread-local variable change when a
child-thread assigns to it, this is a problem. it is a natural result
though
On 8/4/2011 1:35 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 12:43 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
it is a straightforward interpretation of scope:
both lexical and dynamic scope cross code boundaries with no
effects on their behavior.
this makes
On 8/4/2011 6:19 PM, Alan Kay wrote:
Here's the link to the paper
http://www.vpri.org/pdf/rn2005001_learning.pdf
inference:
it is not that basic math and physics are fundamentally so difficult to
understand...
but that many classes portray them as such a confusing and incoherent
mess of
On 8/5/2011 6:13 AM, Ondřej Bílka wrote:
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 03:43:04AM -0700, BGB wrote:
On 8/4/2011 6:19 PM, Alan Kay wrote:
Here's the link to the paper
[1]http://www.vpri.org/pdf/rn2005001_learning.pdf
inference:
it is not that basic math and physics
On 8/5/2011 11:56 AM, Wesley Smith wrote:
vectors are nice though.
for example, in the book I had, some aspects of the topic were expressed in
terms of a mess of trigonometry which wouldn't really work correctly in 3D.
some of these topics were fairly simple/elegant-looking if expressed with
On 8/6/2011 7:27 PM, Simon Forman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:48 AM, Alan Kayalan.n...@yahoo.com wrote:
That was my thought when I first saw what Seymour Papert was doing with
children and LOGO in the 60s. I was thinking about going back into Molecular
Biology, but Seymour showed that
1 - 100 of 229 matches
Mail list logo
