Foolish Fellows Assotiation wrote:
> Hello
>
> Do you think the matrix could be written in lisp?
Wouldn't the actors have a hard time reading a script
in lisp?
goose,
I kid, I kid :-)
> And what language do you think it was written in? :)
From how .. hmm great .. our perceivable world is, how everything is
governed by stupid physical and social laws set in stone (no being
invisible when needed, no debugging reality, ...) I would say .. COBOL.
Roberto Waltman wrote:
> Foolish Fellows Assotiation wrote:
> >Do you think the matrix could be written in lisp?
>
> And what language do you think it was written in? :)
Come on ... too easy ... the matrix was written in machine language ...
--jw.
> Roberto Waltman wrote:
> > Foolish Fellows Assotiation wrote:
> > >Do you think the matrix could be written in lisp?
> > And what language do you think it was written in? :)
> Come on ... too easy ... the matrix was written in machine language ...
MatLab
(Jeeeeez. Can't you guys see a sucker pun coming until it hits you in
the face?! :-)
Foolish Fellows Assotiation <······@poczta,onet.pl> wrote:
> Do you think the matrix could be written in lisp?
Only implementations with full Unicode support. :-)
Foolish Fellows Assotiation wrote:
> Do you think the matrix could be written in lisp?
Unfortunately the movie industry has made very little real progress in
adopting formal methods, and movie scripts are often written in vaguely
specified and ambiguous languages, instead of a formalized language with
a mathematically defined semantics as would be optimal. There are also
spurious complaints about dialogue being difficult for humans to
understand if presented in prefix notation. Hopefully in a few decades
we will begin to see more and more movies based on a sound mathematical
and theoretical foundation.
--
Aatu Koskensilta (················@xortec.fi)
"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Aatu Koskensilta wrote:
> Foolish Fellows Assotiation wrote:
>> Do you think the matrix could be written in lisp?
>
> Unfortunately the movie industry has made very little real progress in
> adopting formal methods, and movie scripts are often written in vaguely
> specified and ambiguous languages, instead of a formalized language with
> a mathematically defined semantics as would be optimal. There are also
> spurious complaints about dialogue being difficult for humans to
> understand if presented in prefix notation. Hopefully in a few decades
> we will begin to see more and more movies based on a sound mathematical
> and theoretical foundation.
>
http://www.hollywoodmath.com/
Aatu Koskensilta <················@xortec.fi> writes:
> Foolish Fellows Assotiation wrote:
>> Do you think the matrix could be written in lisp?
>
> Unfortunately the movie industry has made very little real progress in
> adopting formal methods, and movie scripts are often written in
> vaguely specified and ambiguous languages, instead of a formalized
> language with a mathematically defined semantics as would be
> optimal. There are also spurious complaints about dialogue being
> difficult for humans to understand if presented in prefix
> notation. Hopefully in a few decades we will begin to see more and
> more movies based on a sound mathematical and theoretical foundation.
You can't complain, there are a number of movies that are quite
formally specified:
Toy Story
The Incredible
Finding nemo
Monsters Inc
For the Birds
Cars
etc.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
PLEASE NOTE: Some quantum physics theories suggest that when the
consumer is not directly observing this product, it may cease to
exist or will exist only in a vague and undetermined state.
Pascal Bourguignon wrote:
> You can't complain, there are a number of movies that are quite
> formally specified:
>
> Toy Story
> The Incredible
> Finding nemo
> Monsters Inc
> For the Birds
> Cars
> etc.
Unfortunately the scripts of these movies were probably written in a
language with no formally specified semantics. This makes correctness
proofs virtually impossible, for example, even though mathematically
sound methods were used at some point of the implementation process. I
wonder if the Lisp society has tried to address this shortcoming, or
whether some statically typed language would be better suited for
writing movie scripts.
--
Aatu Koskensilta (················@xortec.fi)
"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Aatu Koskensilta <················@xortec.fi> writes:
> whether some statically typed language would be better suited for
> writing movie scripts.
ROTFL
--
Thomas A. Russ, USC/Information Sciences Institute
From: Ken Tilton
Subject: Re: What language could be written "Matrix"
Date:
Message-ID: <0ifpg.37$Dk.0@fe10.lga>
Thomas A. Russ wrote:
> Aatu Koskensilta <················@xortec.fi> writes:
>
>
>>whether some statically typed language would be better suited for
>>writing movie scripts.
>
>
> ROTFL
>
What are you laughing at?! Trinity's static deathbed speech reminded me
strongly of a programmer typing Java.
kt
--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/
"I'll say I'm losing my grip, and it feels terrific."
-- Smiling husband to scowling wife, New Yorker cartoon
Aatu Koskensilta wrote:
> Pascal Bourguignon wrote:
>
>> You can't complain, there are a number of movies that are quite
>> formally specified:
>>
>> Toy Story
>> The Incredible
>> Finding nemo
>> Monsters Inc
>> For the Birds
>> Cars
>> etc.
>
>
> Unfortunately the scripts of these movies were probably written in a
> language with no formally specified semantics. This makes correctness
> proofs virtually impossible, for example, even though mathematically
> sound methods were used at some point of the implementation process. I
> wonder if the Lisp society has tried to address this shortcoming, or
> whether some statically typed language would be better suited for
> writing movie scripts.
>
Well, the dialog within the scripts may or may not have formal
semantics, depending on how much you believe in Chomsky's theories. The
semantics of the scripts themselves, however, are about as rigid as you
can get without resorting to all those squiggly greek characters.
Scripts that don't conform to the industry's formatting rules have no
chance of getting read, much less produced.
Lispers interested in formal semantics? Sure -- they're called
'Schemers'. Common Lisp's semantics are informally specified and
buggy[1], and nobody's too interested in fixing them. Heck, even
Schemers disagree as to how formally Scheme is specified[2]
1. http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/msg/3a8bcfef0500c8f9
2. http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-75/mail-archive/msg00143.html
> [..] The
> semantics of the scripts themselves, however, are about as rigid as you
> can get without resorting to all those squiggly greek characters.
Here you speak of semantics.
> Scripts that don't conform to the industry's formatting rules have no
> chance of getting read, much less produced.
Here you speak of syntax.
;)
regards,
Stefan
Aatu Koskensilta wrote:
> Pascal Bourguignon wrote:
>> You can't complain, there are a number of movies that are quite
>> formally specified:
>>
>> Toy Story
>> The Incredible
>> Finding nemo
>> Monsters Inc
>> For the Birds
>> Cars
>> etc.
>
> Unfortunately the scripts of these movies were probably written in a
> language with no formally specified semantics. This makes correctness
> proofs virtually impossible, for example, even though mathematically
> sound methods were used at some point of the implementation process. I
> wonder if the Lisp society has tried to address this shortcoming, or
> whether some statically typed language would be better suited for
> writing movie scripts.
Movies are always static - once they're finished, they will never be
changed again.
A good analogy for a dynamically typed approach is a theater play. There
actors and audience can interact, and in some cases of improvisational
theater even dramatically change the play on the fly. Of course, you
don't get the same guarantees that everyone will see the same play.
Pascal
--
3rd European Lisp Workshop
July 3 - Nantes, France - co-located with ECOOP 2006
http://lisp-ecoop06.bknr.net/
Pascal Costanza <··@p-cos.net> wrote:
+---------------
| Movies are always static - once they're finished, they will never be
| changed again.
+---------------
Uh... Can you say "Director's Cut"?
-Rob
-----
Rob Warnock <····@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607
Rob Warnock wrote:
> Pascal Costanza <··@p-cos.net> wrote:
> +---------------
> | Movies are always static - once they're finished, they will never be
> | changed again.
> +---------------
>
> Uh... Can you say "Director's Cut"?
Yes: "Refactoring". ;)
Pascal
--
3rd European Lisp Workshop
July 3 - Nantes, France - co-located with ECOOP 2006
http://lisp-ecoop06.bknr.net/
Pascal Costanza wrote:
> Movies are always static - once they're finished, they will never be
> changed again.
Han shot first!!
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Native Americans used every part
of the buffalo, including the wings.
From: Martin Bishop
Subject: Re: What language could be written "Matrix"
Date:
Message-ID: <87irmgojum.fsf@bellsouth.net>
> Unfortunately the scripts of these movies were probably written in a
> language with no formally specified semantics. This makes correctness
> proofs virtually impossible, for example, even though mathematically
> sound methods were used at some point of the implementation process. I
> wonder if the Lisp society has tried to address this shortcoming, or
> whether some statically typed language would be better suited for
> writing movie scripts.
In last winter semester, the exercise lessons for students taking the AI
course at our university centered around implementing a rudimentary
story telling assistant, actually a little planning system that
generated *correct* stories that satisfied certain constraints like the
initial situation, landmarks during the story and of course a happy end.
This thing was motivated by the fact that I'm usually (not always to the
joy of my mates) a very critical observer of movies and always tend to
complain about inconsistencies in the stories, like:
When you set free a horse and encounter it later in the wildness,
it's very strange that it still is wearing a headstall.
(As seen in The Lord of the Rings).
BTW we used Prolog, but hey, in some respects that's quite close to
Lisp. (have I set loose the dark riders now?)
The whole thing was never meant as a serious project but kept students
motivated (at least most), provided reason why to implement a certain
routine, hence no more complaining: "ok, that's nice, but for what do we
need that?" And was a lot of fun to do.
Actually, I think it's a very interesting project to create a program
that given some hints on the storyboard creates a complete consistent
story and (ok, I'm reaching for the stars now) actually does the
rendering as well, but I guess that's more evenings spent hacking than
there is in a lifetime.
regards,
Stefan
From: Shyamal Prasad
Subject: Re: What language could be written "Matrix"
Date:
Message-ID: <87k66y3b3t.fsf@turtle.local>
>>>>> "Foolish" == Foolish Fellows Assotiation <······@poczta,onet.pl> writes:
Foolish> Hello Do you think the matrix could be written in lisp?
Yes. I'm not thure it would thound great though...
Foolish Fellows Assotiation schrieb:
> Hello
> Do you think the matrix could be written in lisp?
Definitely no.
Agent Smith: The first version was a disaster...
(I guess, this was the Java version)
Now, go down to Zions Archive and dig around there. You will find:
...the machines began to construct themselves to better versions...
(or something like this)
Interpret this to a AI (or KI in .de) -System. Does this mean, an
existing system is able to construct its own syntax and so speak an
completely different language, no human ever can think of?
Well, to get the correct answer, I mean, ask HAL. I'm sure, he is able
to laugh...
Last, what can you do, to make a system able to improve the used syntax?
stefan
but the machine language-answer is perfect, who else understand this
numbers better than a machine.