On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 12:59 AM 'Nil Geisweiller' via opencog < opencog@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> > > PresentLink, AbsentLink---the implementation seems obvious from an > > outside perspective/at first glance. > > I thought that AbsentLink implementation was nearly complete, and the > PresentLink implementation possibly already complete but requiring > more testing. I am not correct? > Both the AbsentLink and PresentLink are fully complete, and work well, with no known bugs. (I fixed a few bugs a week ago). There is no C++ class called `class AbsentLink`. And there probably never will be, because, well, "things just don't work like that". There is no C++ class called `class PresentLink`, because it would be ... pointless. > > I intend to port all my Atomese code to use PresentLink, can I do so > already? I believe I can but your comment is casting some doubt. > Its ready. PresentLink has been working fine for ...I dunno .. maybe five years already? AbsentLink has been working for ten. Shujing found a bug with AbsentLink, which I fixed recently. Also, I think (Not (Present ...)) now works correctly, and is the same as absent. All bets are off if you say (Or (Present x) (Absent y) (Not (And (Absent z) (Not (Or (Present w) (Absent u)))) -- Don't do that. We will hate you if you do. -- Linas > Thanks, > Nil > > -- cassette tapes - analog TV - film cameras - you -- 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 opencog+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to opencog@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA36gwc94RVZ%3Dc0VwqFL0rVLStraO68-pZFLMq7YxgWVLFw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
