On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Kassen <signal.automatique_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
> I'd like to -in the name of being deliberately provocative- point out
> that I am not at all interested in being able to solve all solvable
> problems in this case, and far more interested in being able to
> express all emotions I might feel at the time.
>
That's an excellent observation. I've made similar observations concerning
artistic expression in PL.
I've been contemplating use of fuzzy (probabilistic or weighted) constraint
logics as a basis for emotional and artistic expression [1]. These allow
you to express high-level preferences that have deep, pervasive impacts on
a program's output. If we include some stability and temporal aspects, we
can also address transitions - making systems that transition incrementally
by default, rather than change abruptly by default. (We could design
systems that override the default, but it's nice to have good defaults
pervasive in a system - it's the difference between fragile or robust.)
[1]
http://awelonblue.wordpress.com/2012/09/07/stateless-stable-arts-for-game-development/
> if anyone ran into the problem of being able to express himself...
>
It's important to not confuse Turing power with expressiveness. E.g.
Brainfuck is Turing complete, but quite inexpressive.
It is often the case that non Turing-complete systems can be more
expressive, especially when you want to express high-level properties of a
program.
Regards,
Dave
--
bringing s-words to a pen fight
Received on Sun Jan 13 2013 - 01:05:38 GMT