Tonight I hope to complete the entire MIT book on scheme in detail. Here is a link to an on-line version. I have programmed with scheme and interfaced to gimp with scheme methods. It is my intent to write a simple scheme program that implements an interpreter that in turn replaces the scheme interpreter to scale to a complete system. Syntactically it is very simple and the complexity is encountered at the level of complex applications. This is typical of all languages and systems that I have encountered. What I hope to gain is an idea about ways to improve the flexibility of a system by creating a core that adapts to additional methods in a way that is extensible. At least that is one of my goals, the other is to create a script converter to Python or C. λ is a symbol commonly used to represent scheme, however there is significant key symbol over loading there as it is typically used to represent the wavelength of light (i.e. λf=c) and many other things in context. So I will say programming.λ if the context is ambiguous.
The significant elements of the book will be added here:
The overall process reminds me of many things, including my early days of BAL ( IBM machine language ) ( H-I A-B L-M 9000 , Yes Dave? ( I didn't lock you out in space and you never built a space ship and it is 9 years after 2001, so who is really to blame for that?)) Thus HAL=IBM -1 corresponding ASCII. CDR,CAR, ZAP, ... It may be that the approach is just not complete because the concept of the implementation is improperly structured. I will consider that. It seems unusual that if I have a computer that can search a dictionary and understand spoken commands, why would it be necessary to use if( gamma==beta){} when a preprocessor is quite capable of allowing the specification of action at a near English level and the interface need not be so arbitrarily obtuse. It would seem that it could be done as this :
#define "is mathematically equal" ==, or some such. I am considering what might make more sense and still be familiar to myself and others, while allowing an equivalent more precise and natural interface to the process control.
Something that is very intriguing is the implementation of a logic solver for the Kalotan puzzle and others. There is something that is hidden in the implementation of the solution that is possibly as useful as the concept definition of certainty. I grasp the logic of the implementation of the solution and that is enlightening. It is an interesting concept as a whole that a sequence of methods and their product can be indeterminate or decided by conflicting results that imply that either the assumptions and/or premise are failed or the situation itself is impossible. [PlaneT Scheme](sic) is also very interesting. The Internet is a dream come true for a polymath. I think that Isaac Newton or Archimedes would faint if they had these kind of tools.
One of the problems that is encountered constantly in all areas of programming and science is pre-requisites. The problem of dependency is everywhere. One of the problems that is rarely discussed is that many programs have library dependencies or environment, or even machine architecture dependencies that are the greatest part of what is needed to achieve a certain goal. Understanding library dependence and usage along with knowing what subjects must be understood before attempting to understand or implement a specific task is one of the most important foundational talents IMHO.
It seems there are a lot of interesting things to learn relating to scheme which seem to be implemented in a rather prehistoric way. The concepts are no less valid, however it needs to be extended for the 21st century. Some of the relationships need to be integrated with other tools. I will try to make some images or blends to express what can be done with the interface. There are some relationships between Spice and integrated circuit design that seem a good fit.
0 comments:
Post a Comment