RE: [feyerabend-project] modernism/postmodernism, was Re: CL and modernism
- Patrick Logan wrote:
> >> I like to think of ZetaLisp, CL andPatrick wrote:
> Smalltalk as representing a
> bare-maximums that work to make me
> productive in building interesting
> or complex
> systems. I find those bare-minimum
> languages to be like living in a
> tent, something that can be fun for a day
> or two but not a serious
> place to live. I find
> that working with a collection of little
> languages and tools is
> somewhat like living in a tent city. <<
Yep, sometime the tent just comes down in the middle
of a storm.
I recently gave up the prescriptive Java/XML
implementation of a WFMC (workflow management coalition)
compliant workflow management system (because of
language and paradigm limitations), and turned the
workflow system into a declarative CLIPS implementation
using Jess. (Our goal is to eventually provide the
implementation in SweetJess, Jess's XML cousin that uses
DAML+OIL and Rule ML so that we can program in "XML" and
satisfy what corporate America wants to hear:
"It is in Java and in XML"
we'll give them SweetJess :-) which is of course a
logical-functional Trojan horse.
Our code in Jess is about 1/5 of what it used to be and
I can do things that are nearly impossible using
the prescriptive and XML forms.
Did I mention that it is also mobile, concurrent safe,
and changeable at runtime (dynamic rules, functions, facts
created on the fly)?
The next release of Jess will add Lisp-like macros ....
Btw, does anyone know of a native CLIPS implementation in
Lisp? (Currently I added a PROLOG library to my lisp but
it doesn't quite feel like CLIPS.)
Patrick Logan wrote:
> I think this is why Scheme in a JVM worksScheme is definitely a good place to be. In my case
> so well for me. The JVM enables a very
> feature rich environment and Scheme enables
> a very powerful way to access the
> environment. This feels "bare maximum" in
> the sense that a Lisp machine used to feel
> that way, plus it grows with every useful
> Java class I find on the net. Kind of a
> dessert topping *and* a floor wax.
I needed features that were more akin to Curry (the
logical Haskell cousin). In fact, in the future
we are considering using the Xurry virtual machine (a logical-functional
virtual machine that sits on top of Java).
Some rough estimates indicate that our Xurry code will
be between 1/5 and 1/10 of what our original wfmc
prescriptive code used to look like,