On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Norman Richards wrote:
> PLDB was written against the current core.logic release. I have not yet
> started testing with the 0.8 pre releases, but judging from the recent
> core.logic announcement, now is probably a good time to start. :)
Please do. I'll probably
On Mar 14, 2013, at 4:15 PM, JvJ wrote:
> I'm not sure how else to go about contacting you about this, but I've found
> some problems in pldb. The system just doesn't seem to work at all with the
> core.logic 0.8.0 builds. I'm not too familiar with the guts of pldb or
> core.logic, but I'm
JvJ writes:
>I'm not sure how else to go about contacting you about this, but I've
>found some problems in pldb. The system just doesn't seem to work at
>all with the core.logic 0.8.0 builds. I'm not too familiar with the
>guts of pldb or core.logic, but I'm wondering if maybe s
That's likely though pldb is so small I don't really think it would require
much in the way of changes.
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 5:15 PM, JvJ wrote:
> I'm not sure how else to go about contacting you about this, but I've
> found some problems in pldb. The system just doesn't seem to work at all
I'm not sure how else to go about contacting you about this, but I've found
some problems in pldb. The system just doesn't seem to work at all with
the core.logic 0.8.0 builds. I'm not too familiar with the guts of pldb or
core.logic, but I'm wondering if maybe some implementation changes lead
Thanks so much! I'll check it out tomorrow!
On Monday, 4 March 2013 10:51:48 UTC-5, Norman Richards wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:03 PM, JvJ >wrote:
>
>> It states that retractions aren't yet implemented. Is there any way to
>> delete facts?
>
>
> Retractions are now supported. DB m
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:03 PM, JvJ wrote:
> It states that retractions aren't yet implemented. Is there any way to
> delete facts?
Retractions are now supported. DB merging and cross-DB logic queries are
still coming. Feel free to comment on the github issues if you have
specific use cases
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:32 PM, JvJ wrote:
> One more thing I'd like to ask. Is it possible to combine the databases
> in a way?
>
> For instance, I'd like to have a universal database that every agent can
> access, as well as agent-specific databases. I understand that databases
> can be modi
One more thing I'd like to ask. Is it possible to combine the databases in
a way?
For instance, I'd like to have a universal database that every agent can
access, as well as agent-specific databases. I understand that databases
can be modified in a purely functional way (which is great), but
If it's not too much trouble, it's something I'd like to see, but I'm sure
I can find a way around it somehow.
On Wednesday, 27 February 2013 17:08:24 UTC-5, Norman Richards wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:03 PM, JvJ >wrote:
>
>> It states that retractions aren't yet implemented. Is the
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:03 PM, JvJ wrote:
> It states that retractions aren't yet implemented. Is there any way to
> delete facts?
This is something I want to add, and if it's something you could use now,
I'll bump up priority of getting that in. What we do is just build a new
logic db for
It states that retractions aren't yet implemented. Is there any way to
delete facts?
On Wednesday, 27 February 2013 16:45:07 UTC-5, Norman Richards wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:50 PM, JvJ >wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm creating something with core.logic that involves multiple
>> "agents"(not t
Wow. Thanks, this will probably help a lot!
On Wednesday, 27 February 2013 16:45:07 UTC-5, Norman Richards wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:50 PM, JvJ >wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm creating something with core.logic that involves multiple
>> "agents"(not the same as a clojure agent!) which each ha
I'm also enthusiastic about eventually replacing the current core.logic
defrel/fact stuff with this excellent work.
David
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Norman Richards wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:50 PM, JvJ wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm creating something with core.logic that involves multi
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:50 PM, JvJ wrote:
>
> I'm creating something with core.logic that involves multiple "agents"(not
> the same as a clojure agent!) which each have distinct knowledge. I'd like
> to know the best way of going about separating the knowledge base so that
> it can be accessed
Actually, I figured it out. I just didn't realize you had to do the #'
thing to get the meta from a function.
But! I'm basically going to write a variation of run* that binds an agent
to the first argument of any "knowledge-based" relations. So, if they have
something like {:knowledge true}
Hrm, how are you going to consume that metadata?
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:26 PM, JvJ wrote:
> Actually, I have a quick question. How could I modify the following code
> to add some metadata to he newly defined relation?
>
> (defmacro defkrel
> "Macro for defining knowledge-based relations."
Actually, I have a quick question. How could I modify the following code
to add some metadata to he newly defined relation?
(defmacro defkrel
"Macro for defining knowledge-based relations."
[nme & rest]
`(defrel ~nme
~'agent
~@rest))
On Wednesday, 27 February 2013 16:17:30 UTC
Thanks for the quick reply. I guess I'll go through with my initial plan
and see what happens. Thanks.
On Wednesday, 27 February 2013 16:14:49 UTC-5, David Nolen wrote:
>
> Sounds like an interesting idea though I can't give much guidance about
> how to approach it. Curious to know how it goes
Sounds like an interesting idea though I can't give much guidance about how
to approach it. Curious to know how it goes though!
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 3:50 PM, JvJ wrote:
>
> I'm creating something with core.logic that involves multiple "agents"(not
> the same as a clojure agent!) which each h
I'm creating something with core.logic that involves multiple "agents"(not
the same as a clojure agent!) which each have distinct knowledge. I'd like
to know the best way of going about separating the knowledge base so that
it can be accessed by each agent individually.
The simplest thing I c
21 matches
Mail list logo
