Dave Dyer wrote:
Languages like SQL and Prolog don't specify algorithms, they describe
the desired result.
What's the difference? The two are very much intermingled when you get
to high-level optimizations.
I agree that the quality of compilers that turn these
specifications into algorithms can improve dramatically, and that
this kind of specification is a great way to increase the productivity
of programming languages.
Getting back to go.... In my dreams I could write
"select groups where safety<alpha and size<beta and color=black"
As I said before, perhaps we /need/ a domain specific language for go
AIs. It would be wonderful if a compiler knew the best algorithm for a
specific need, and could see through a whole program and see what needs
overlap and what data can be shared between algorithms. This is the
biggest stumbling block for me when implementing things in an OO
language; if you share information, you decrease maintainability, and
make things harder to unravel later, but if you don't, you lose
performance because the compiler isn't *quite* smart enough to see the
common parts yet.
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
