On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 12:28:21PM -0700, Steve Richfield via AGI wrote: > Hi all, > > Some thoughts that might bring this together: > > 2. (Logan) SPEL is interesting, but it doesn't seem to be at any > particular meta-level, and in particular, doesn't seem to be particularly > suited to defining complex structures (as in PM's diagram) as future AGIs > would probably be. APL would be semantically better, but has serious syntax > issues. We need the best of both.
Okay well I briefly looked into APL, I certainly see what you mean by the syntax issues. Not sure what you mean by semantically better, as far as I know, it's mostly array based programming. Though they syntax certainly makes it seems somewhat like brainf**k or whitespace, intentionally obfuscated. technically SPEL can express structures of any given complexity, just as human languages are able to. I'm however not sure of what diagram you refer to, so can't give a description of it as an example. > Steve > =================== from Logan ya ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
