I know a lot of programs collect usage statistics.  Does # of times used
mean popular, good, or something that needs to be automated?  I see your
point.  We don't want to automate the back button yet.
On Feb 15, 2013 2:52 PM, "David Barbour" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Can POLs be designed such that uses of POLs ensure good design?  Good
>> architecture?  I am way beyond my technical knowledge here.
>
>
> Bad code can be written in any language, and even good code can be used to
> develop bad ideas and architectures. You can't ever "ensure" good design,
> not least of all because it's unreasonably difficult to define "good".
>
> But you can develop POLs that "encourage" useful features that tend to be
> part of a good design, i.e. by making the path-of-least-resistance be the
> right thing, by supporting compositional reasoning and static analysis, by
> making tests easy to specify and perform. Conversational or self-explaining
> computations can make documentation more interactive. All this is also true
> of general purpose programming. Though, when you have problem-specific
> languages you can usually achieve a much higher degree of composition.
> (E.g. it's easier to compose graphics than to compose arbitrary
> subprograms.)
>
> Probabilistic languages certainly have a lot of utility at the
> human-computer interface - not only for text commands, but for use of voice
> or gesture. (There is an augmented-programming google group that's
> interested in such possibilities. The notion of 'live programming' tends to
> bridge the gap with HCI.)
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 11:33 AM, John Carlson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I guess what I am asking for is a critic service.  For both POLs and uses
>> of POLs.  Can POLs be designed such that uses of POLs ensure good design?
>> Good architecture?  I am way beyond my technical knowledge here.
>>  On Feb 15, 2013 1:19 PM, "John Carlson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I know of a few sites/tools which critcise your wesite...is there one
>>> for css?
>>> On Feb 15, 2013 1:02 PM, "John Carlson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sorry we got into a big discussion about the web.  I really want to
>>>> discuss POLs for rules, css being one of them.  And in particular, once we
>>>> have a good POL, how to test it, and author with it--how to create a great
>>>> POL program?
>>>> >
>>>> > But what about probablistic rules?  Can we design an ultimate website
>>>> w/o a designer?  Can we use statistics to create a great solitaire
>>>> player--i have a pretty good stochastic solitaire player for one version of
>>>> solitaire...how about others?  How does one create a great set of rules?
>>>> One can create great rule POLs, but where are the authors?  Something like
>>>> cameron browne's thesis seems great for grid games.  He is quite prolific.
>>>> Can we apply the same logic to card games? Web sites?  We have "The Nature
>>>> of Order" by c. Alexander.  Are there nile designers or fuzz
>>>> testers/genetic algorithms for nile?
>>>> > Is fuzz testing a by product of nile design...should it be?
>>>> >
>>>> > If you want to check out the state of the art for dungeons and
>>>> dragons POLs check out fantasy grounds...xml hell.  We can do better.
>>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> fonc mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> bringing s-words to a pen fight
>
> _______________________________________________
> fonc mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
>
>
_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
[email protected]
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc

Reply via email to