Re: [lojban] Programming Languages for Lojban

["Robert J. Chassell" <bob@RATTLESNAKE.COM>]

If one were to try to parse Lojban and use it for the internal workings of
an inference engine, would Lisp or Prolog be more appropriate?

Lisp is perceived as a more general purpose language than Prolog, so
it more closely matches Lojban, which is a completely general purpose
language.

Also, people have written interpreters for many different programming
languages in Lisp; I don't think as many have been written in Prolog.
So someone who is willing to stand on the shoulders of others will
have an easier time with Lisp.

Am I right in thinking that you plan to write most of your inference
engine in Lojban, and that you plan to use the Lisp or Prolog as just
a boot strap mechanism?

I am looking forward to your write ups about turning Lojban into a
humanly speakable programming language. What is involved in making
type checking optional? (The Lojban grammar makes it so, since you
have a choice of including or not including a restrictive clause,
i.e., one that tells you the type of the argument.) Under which
circumstances will people prefer to use an imperative format, in which
the computer is a robot that responds to orders, or prefer a format in
which the computer answers questions?

-- 
Robert J. Chassell bob@rattlesnake.com
Rattlesnake Enterprises http://www.rattlesnake.com