From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sun Oct 22 16:59:41 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 22 Oct 2006 16:59:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GbnDs-0002nB-D1 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sun, 22 Oct 2006 16:59:20 -0700 Received: from pi.meson.org ([66.134.26.207]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GbnDo-0002my-3e for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 22 Oct 2006 16:59:20 -0700 Received: (qmail 10279 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2006 23:59:12 -0000 Received: from nagas.meson.org (HELO ?192.168.1.101?) (1000@192.168.1.101) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 22 Oct 2006 23:59:12 -0000 Message-ID: <453C05CF.1060100@kli.org> Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 19:59:11 -0400 From: "Mark E. Shoulson" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20060909) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: binary Lojban References: <1161531142.453b8f06acbcf@webmail.pdx.edu> <453BA904.3010909@kli.org> <1161550551.453bdad70d6f2@webmail.pdx.edu> In-Reply-To: <1161550551.453bdad70d6f2@webmail.pdx.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 12769 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: mark@kli.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Ryan Keppel wrote: > How about you match what I have given to Lojban? Huh? I am thinking that you > will have no reply to this. Huh? Eh? > Er, how do you know I haven't? I've been involved in Lojban longer than you, since even before your first association with it. Robin says I am "not far behind you," so I guess I'll have to take that as confirmation that I have not yet met your goal. Although in the years I've been here, for all my distractions and everything, I think I have contributed a whole lot of intellectual energy and resources to The Cause, maybe even more than you have. At any rate, all that is neither here nor there; it doesn't matter the tiniest bit even if I had contributed nothing up till now. It doesn't speak to what you were talking about. To the topic at hand, though: you were asking about a "binary" version of Lojban, in the same sense that Python bytecode is a binary version of Python. It doesn't even really matter what the bytecode is, though, since I suppose one could write any number of languages not at all like Python that still compile to Python bytecode, or to Java bytecode, and so on. I suppose we could use one of those for Lojban's bytecode as well, though it would be a very restricted form of the language (since most of the gismu of Lojban don't have much meaning in terms of computer operations). A higher-level Lojbanic bytecode for interpretation by and as an AI would be nice, but I think we can't do anything meaningful in that direction until first we have some decent AI working with and from Lojban as it is. We could try to write a Lojban-to-JVM compiler, I suppose, essentially making Lojban a programming language. Or write a Lojban-oriented VM, though I don't really see what such a thing would be. I think someone once wrote a Lojban-to-Prolog compiler or interpreter, which is sort of along those lines. I still somehow doubt any of these solutions are what you are looking for, which makes me think I'm not understanding what you want very well. ~mark To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.