John, you're right. I have seen raw binary used as DNA and I left that out. This could be my own prejudice, but it seems like a messy way to do things. I suppose I want to limit what the animal can do by constraining it to some set of "safe" primitives. Maybe that's a silly thing to worry about, though. If we're going to grow software, I suppose maybe I should expect the process to be as messy as life is:)
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 4:06 PM, John Carlson <yottz...@gmail.com> wrote: > I meant to say you could perform and record operations while the program > was running. > > I think people have missed machine language as "syntaxless." > On Sep 4, 2013 4:17 PM, "John Carlson" <yottz...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> On Sep 3, 2013 8:25 PM, "Casey Ransberger" <casey.obrie...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > It yields a kind of "syntaxlessness" that's interesting. >> >> Our TWB/TE language was mostly syntaxless. Instead, you performed >> operations on desktop objects that were recorded (like AppleScript, but >> with an iconic language). You could even record while the program was >> running. We had a tiny bit of syntax in our predicates, stuff like range >> and set notation. >> >> Can anyone describe Minecraft's syntax and semantics? >> > > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > fonc@vpri.org > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc > > -- CALIFORNIA H U M A N
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
