#versu — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #versu, aggregated by home.social.
-
Well, even though I was working on Selanía too these days, I've been able to get to the end of the expansion mechanism too! Now I can write stuff like
```
Have you heard of what [Gossippee.subj] said yesterday?
No! What did [Gossippee.subj] do?
Well, you know, someone gave [Gossippee.obj] the excuse to...
```And have it expand to
```
Have you heard of what Mary said yesterday?
No! What did she do?
Well, you know, someone gave her the excuse to...
``` -
Well, even though I was working on Selanía too these days, I've been able to get to the end of the expansion mechanism too! Now I can write stuff like
```
Have you heard of what [Gossippee.subj] said yesterday?
No! What did [Gossippee.subj] do?
Well, you know, someone gave [Gossippee.obj] the excuse to...
```And have it expand to
```
Have you heard of what Mary said yesterday?
No! What did she do?
Well, you know, someone gave her the excuse to...
``` -
Well, even though I was working on Selanía too these days, I've been able to get to the end of the expansion mechanism too! Now I can write stuff like
```
Have you heard of what [Gossippee.subj] said yesterday?
No! What did [Gossippee.subj] do?
Well, you know, someone gave [Gossippee.obj] the excuse to...
```And have it expand to
```
Have you heard of what Mary said yesterday?
No! What did she do?
Well, you know, someone gave her the excuse to...
``` -
In order to expand strings like
"Hello, [greeting.towards.Person]."
I must know context about Person (like: do I hate them? I love them? I'm neutral?), which means that intelligent expansions must be used (context free grammars with conditions from the current state of the game, in practice), which means that they are not just syntactic replacement but need the whole machinery of the runtime engine, which means moving lots of code... AAAAA xD -
In order to expand strings like
"Hello, [greeting.towards.Person]."
I must know context about Person (like: do I hate them? I love them? I'm neutral?), which means that intelligent expansions must be used (context free grammars with conditions from the current state of the game, in practice), which means that they are not just syntactic replacement but need the whole machinery of the runtime engine, which means moving lots of code... AAAAA xD -
In order to expand strings like
"Hello, [greeting.towards.Person]."
I must know context about Person (like: do I hate them? I love them? I'm neutral?), which means that intelligent expansions must be used (context free grammars with conditions from the current state of the game, in practice), which means that they are not just syntactic replacement but need the whole machinery of the runtime engine, which means moving lots of code... AAAAA xD -
Fixed also the last bug regarding axiom/rules exploration. Which allows you to drill-down in axiom expansions, and sub-axiom expansions and so on.
Now, in the space between the work on Selanìa, I can get to attack (my version of) Prolog's definite clause grammars.
It will probably be a more pragmatic approach, strongly oriented towards the narrative usages, with dedicated syntax, although it will be 100% based on exclusion logic like the rest.
-
Fixed also the last bug regarding axiom/rules exploration. Which allows you to drill-down in axiom expansions, and sub-axiom expansions and so on.
Now, in the space between the work on Selanìa, I can get to attack (my version of) Prolog's definite clause grammars.
It will probably be a more pragmatic approach, strongly oriented towards the narrative usages, with dedicated syntax, although it will be 100% based on exclusion logic like the rest.
-
Fixed also the last bug regarding axiom/rules exploration. Which allows you to drill-down in axiom expansions, and sub-axiom expansions and so on.
Now, in the space between the work on Selanìa, I can get to attack (my version of) Prolog's definite clause grammars.
It will probably be a more pragmatic approach, strongly oriented towards the narrative usages, with dedicated syntax, although it will be 100% based on exclusion logic like the rest.
-
Big commit on #Suetum to improve axioms (rules). Now you can write mutually recursive rules, and Habitus is also kind-of able to show them (there are still cases in which it can't expand an axiom, in case the very first rule of the axiom already fails)!
https://codeberg.org/owofgames/suetum/commit/d90f8f4d2a5fa3db54c0a8448a28724833798874
-
Big commit on #Suetum to improve axioms (rules). Now you can write mutually recursive rules, and Habitus is also kind-of able to show them (there are still cases in which it can't expand an axiom, in case the very first rule of the axiom already fails)!
https://codeberg.org/owofgames/suetum/commit/d90f8f4d2a5fa3db54c0a8448a28724833798874
-
Big commit on #Suetum to improve axioms (rules). Now you can write mutually recursive rules, and Habitus is also kind-of able to show them (there are still cases in which it can't expand an axiom, in case the very first rule of the axiom already fails)!
https://codeberg.org/owofgames/suetum/commit/d90f8f4d2a5fa3db54c0a8448a28724833798874
-
I kind of, sort of forgot that axioms are parts of the system, and right now they are completely opaque to the debugger.
So! Let's expand the system the allows for notifications during the unification of logic clauses to work also on axioms, and track a "stack" of the resolution.
This was quite tricky, and revealed a bug in recursive axiom applications, but: it's done! Now, how to properly display it...
-
I kind of, sort of forgot that axioms are parts of the system, and right now they are completely opaque to the debugger.
So! Let's expand the system the allows for notifications during the unification of logic clauses to work also on axioms, and track a "stack" of the resolution.
This was quite tricky, and revealed a bug in recursive axiom applications, but: it's done! Now, how to properly display it...
-
I kind of, sort of forgot that axioms are parts of the system, and right now they are completely opaque to the debugger.
So! Let's expand the system the allows for notifications during the unification of logic clauses to work also on axioms, and track a "stack" of the resolution.
This was quite tricky, and revealed a bug in recursive axiom applications, but: it's done! Now, how to properly display it...
-
The work on the debugging tool for #Suetum is reaching its completion, but this is the most dense part, conceptually.
Added the possibility to see the agents' heuristics, to time travel (!) between the current and past states of the simulations, and what I'm now working on is the ability of creating "alternative" world states, where you simulate a different choice from the one picked by the game purely inside the debugging tool.
-
The work on the debugging tool for #Suetum is reaching its completion, but this is the most dense part, conceptually.
Added the possibility to see the agents' heuristics, to time travel (!) between the current and past states of the simulations, and what I'm now working on is the ability of creating "alternative" world states, where you simulate a different choice from the one picked by the game purely inside the debugging tool.
-
The work on the debugging tool for #Suetum is reaching its completion, but this is the most dense part, conceptually.
Added the possibility to see the agents' heuristics, to time travel (!) between the current and past states of the simulations, and what I'm now working on is the ability of creating "alternative" world states, where you simulate a different choice from the one picked by the game purely inside the debugging tool.
-
So, apparently, yes: it was a matter of an afternoon to add support for forall/exists quantification in #Suetum 😮
(also added the possibility to explore the bindings that matched the conditions, to debug problems in matching, and set an icon too)
-
So, apparently, yes: it was a matter of an afternoon to add support for forall/exists quantification in #Suetum 😮
(also added the possibility to explore the bindings that matched the conditions, to debug problems in matching, and set an icon too)
-
So, apparently, yes: it was a matter of an afternoon to add support for forall/exists quantification in #Suetum 😮
(also added the possibility to explore the bindings that matched the conditions, to debug problems in matching, and set an icon too)
-
Welp, looks like "for all" and "exists" operator are indeed necessary to build logic programs like i need.
So, this afternoon will be dedicated to that... because it will be... very... simple... to add quantifiers... right? >_>
-
Welp, looks like "for all" and "exists" operator are indeed necessary to build logic programs like i need.
So, this afternoon will be dedicated to that... because it will be... very... simple... to add quantifiers... right? >_>
-
Welp, looks like "for all" and "exists" operator are indeed necessary to build logic programs like i need.
So, this afternoon will be dedicated to that... because it will be... very... simple... to add quantifiers... right? >_>