Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bill Andersen
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 7:43 AM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] using SKOS for controlled values
Do you also make up new, more "powerful", instruction sets
for the processors in your favorite computer? Seems that would be a good
way to get around those nasty chip makers. They're *so* dogmatic. Not to
mention that Turing guy, the king of dogmatists.
Actually, yes, I have at numerous times constructed
specialized instructions using microprograms to implement them. A typical
microcoded instruction would be a reformulation of an often used procedure or
function which takes up a lot of cpu time. If you have ever tried
microprogramming, you know how easy it is to create specialized languages with
all the specialized, high efficiency instructions that interpret them. In
fact, it is easier to write microcoded interpreters than to build compilers,
and far more efficient to run them - factors from 3 to 10 are common, with very
occasional major gains as high as 100 times the speed.
I think you should consider the concept of
expressiveness, not just the math behind FOL, because it has been the basic
idea behind computer languages of all sorts, numerical, logical, even
application oriented instructions such as discrete Fourier transforms, which
resulted in application specific processor sets. TI has long made signal
processing cpus which have specially coded instructions for the appropriately
computation consuming areas.
On many occasions, the expressiveness of a language
determines the practical limits on what can be built in that language. When
Fortran I and Lisp 1.5 were the most advanced languages around (fifties and
sixties), software was crude and inconvenient, not to mention ineffective in
many areas. When Pascal and OO techniques began to be implemented in
HOLs, the ability to represent the program logic became much more
reader-friendly and writer-friendly, and that is when software complexity began
to take off.
In my opinion, the same thing will happen (in its own
unique way) with the semantic web. The RDF layer, subset of FOL that it
is, will have to be improved in subsequent products to be able to meet the
goals of many of the subscribers to this list. Wait and watch.
On Oct 12, 2010, at 10:29, "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> I didn't realize your only interest is in the dogmatic.
Sorry to confuse
> you with practical considerations.
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx