arundelo comments on Sensual Experience - Less Wrong

13 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 21 December 2008 12:56AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (84)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: IlyaShpitser 23 January 2013 03:02:45PM *  2 points [-]

My point wasn't actually that it's a useful thing to pursue shortest ways of writing a given algorithm. In fact I am not an APL expert, and find it hard to read. My point is that there is no particular reason other than inertia that we happen to formalize mathematical/algorithmic ideas via a linear string of ascii characters. In fact, this representation makes it unnatural to {reason about|write algorithms on} many common types of structures. The fact that many attempts to do something better do poorly (as the great-grand-parent poster experienced) does not mean improvements do not exist -- the space is very large.

For example, a regular expression is a graph. Why on earth do we insist on encoding it as a very hard to read string of ASCII? (I am sure one could be a very efficient regexp jockey with practice, but in some sense the representation is working against us and our powerful vision subsystem). There are all these theorems in graphical models that have proofs much easier for humans to follow because they use graph theory and not algebra, etc.

Comment author: arundelo 23 January 2013 04:12:43PM 0 points [-]

If you don't already know about it, you'll enjoy reading about Olin Shivers's SRE regex notation.

Comment author: IlyaShpitser 23 January 2013 04:24:22PM *  1 point [-]

Yes, I am aware of this (and lispy things in general), but thanks! s-expressions are great if you like metaprogramming, but they share the same fundamental problem as ordinary regular expressions -- they encode non-linear structures as a line of ASCII.

Actually, there is no reason macro-based metaprogramming couldn't work in a language that uses graphs as a priimitive UI element, rather than a list like LISP does. "Graph rewriting" is practically a cottage industry.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 23 January 2013 04:34:12PM 0 points [-]

Actually, there is no reason macro-based metaprogramming couldn't work in a language that uses graphs as a priimitive UI element, rather than a list like LISP does. "Graph rewriting" is practically a cottage industry.

Where you wrote "UI element", did you mean "data structure"? I don't know what it would mean to talk about graphs as a primitive user interface element.

With a language with sufficiently expressive metaprogramming facilities (LISP enthusiasts will recommend LISP for this role) you can extend it with whatever data structures you want.

Comment author: IlyaShpitser 23 January 2013 05:59:23PM 0 points [-]

I guess I meant both a data structure and a visual representation of a data structure (in LISP they are almost the same, which is what makes metaprogramming in LISP so natural).