Am Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:38:50 +1200
schrieb "Richard A. O'Keefe" <
ok@...>:
> Never in the history of the universe has a WORD grasped any part of
> the meaning of anything.
I disagree. With its sounding a word can have at least one aspect of
its meaning. For example take the English 'tree' and the German 'Baum':
Both point to the same, 'tree' shows the aspect of the high growing,
'Baum' means the widespread archaic. And therefore there are no two
words with the same meaning.
This point of view has let me trying to implement something as a
structure with a variable (set of) slot(s) and a definition of its type
to have variable possibilities and constraints of linking to other
structures of this kind (even recursively ...). These structures could
be words in contrary to symbols.
Could this be an approach for thinking about new programming languages?
Grüße, Gerhard
------------
For further info, please visit
http://www.swi-prolog.org/To unsubscribe, send a plaintext mail with "unsubscribe prolog <e-mail>"
in its body to
majordomo@...
