Re: [opencog-dev] Java 8

2017-07-31 Thread Ben Goertzel
> In the meanwhile, there is an effort is to create a scripting language that > will allow non-programmer artists to create scripted actions and reactions. > Unfortunately, this completely blows-off and ignores the concept of a > "middle form", and so there is no path forward from scripting to a

Re: [opencog-dev] Java 8

2017-07-31 Thread Linas Vepstas
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Adrian Borucki wrote: > 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

RE: [opencog-dev] Java 8

2017-07-31 Thread David Xanatos
Subject: Re: [opencog-dev] Java 8 No one is. Here are example implementations for other scheme dialects https://github.com/Calysto/calysto_scheme https://github.com/joeltg/mit-scheme-kernel Have a blast :-) On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 1:53:26 AM UTC+8, Adrian Borucki wrote: On Friday

Re: [opencog-dev] Java 8

2017-07-30 Thread AmeBel
No one is. Here are example implementations for other scheme dialects https://github.com/Calysto/calysto_scheme https://github.com/joeltg/mit-scheme-kernel Have a blast :-) On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 1:53:26 AM UTC+8, Adrian Borucki wrote: > > > > On Friday, 28 July 2017 09:26:19 UTC+2,

Re: [opencog-dev] Java 8

2017-07-28 Thread Ben Goertzel
I mean -- just making another scripting-language wrapper for Atomspace and associated cognitive-process interactions doesn't really accomplish anything, that's all... Right now we have bindings in Scheme, pretty-thorough ones in python, very partial ones in Haskell ... but pretty much only the

Re: [opencog-dev] Java 8

2017-07-27 Thread Linas Vepstas
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

Re: [opencog-dev] Java 8

2017-07-27 Thread Adrian Borucki
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

Re: [opencog-dev] Java 8

2017-07-26 Thread Ed Pell
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

Re: [opencog-dev] Java 8

2017-07-26 Thread Ben Goertzel
Well but seriously... it depends on how and why... We are open to anything if it's the best way to achieve some important functionality... But we don't want to introduce additional complexities lightly We have Java in the codebase now, in the form of RelEx ... but we're planning to eliminate

Re: [opencog-dev] Java 8

2017-07-26 Thread Ben Goertzel
How does a world-class athlete and health-food nut feel about eating a 100-pound barrel of sugar laced with chocolate, vegemite and cyanide? ;-) On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 10:53 PM, Ed Pell wrote: > How does the Opencog team feel about adding code in Java 8? > > -- > You