[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Date Index Thread Index Search archive:
Date:Mon Aug 21 10:29:13 2003 
Subject:Re: poplog interactive mode - PS -> Syntax editor 
From:eas-lab 
Volume-ID:1030821.03 

> >> > I don't even KNOW about <completion>.
> >> 
> >> It's whatever you have to type to do completion in the editor. I don't
> >> have it, but it would be easy to implement in ved (pick a boring key
> >> sequence, bind it to a function that looks left for a word, looks it
> >> up in a completion table, and fills in the found template.)
> >> 
> > Yes I know WHAT completion means; just not that it's available for poplog
> > ? If I've missed the availability of 'completion' for ved, imagine what
> > else I've missed !
> 
 Chris Dollin wrote:
> Of *course* it's "available"; you can extend Ved with user-defined code.
> If you want it, you can have it. As I briefly noted, you just have to
> bind a procedure [or name] to a key-sequence and have it poke around
> in the Ved buffer.

That confirms my suggestion: since poplog/ved is so easily extendable,
extra value (more powerfull IDE) can be economically acheived, and 
therefore by definition should be done.   BTW if YOU've added 
'completion' it should be be made public to the poplog community !

> >> > If there are < 6 possible choices at some stage of the source text,
> >> > I don't want to have to think/remember, but just select.
> >> 
> >> Are there such places? Not many of them, surely.
> >> 
> > Indeed many. Look at the 'branching points' on the syntax diagrams.
> 
> Pop doesn't *have* syntax diagrams. We are talking Pop here, aren't we?
> Examples. 

Well let me use that question as a vehicle to test & show what I mean by
'menu-assisted' tasking:
* I'll go to my linux box and trace the number of steps I need to do,
to find the 'syntax diagrams':

./nS > Poplog > <CTRL> ref syntax ==>  REF * POPSYNTAX
     Full syntax diagrams of Pop-11.

What a pleasant suprise: from a terminal, I started poplog and found
the 'syntax diagrams' in a total of 4 steps !!
Seldom am I so lucky.
I still can't re-find how to 'direct jump' using eg: REF * POPSYNTAX;
 nor will any one tell me.  I'll re-find it one day when looking for
 something else.

Since I can't cut and paste the syntax diagram, I will use the
 corresponding text (on the same REF * POPSYNTAX) to answer your question
about 'decision points':

]     4.3   Iteration
]             ... while
]             ... until
]             ... repeat
]             ... for

So when the designer (vs. typist/clerk) decides that he wants to use an
Iteration construct, he simply 'picks' the <iterantion construct>
menu (which is itself one of a limited selection, based on the point
in the syntax were he is/was), and selects WHICH iteration class...etc.

A previous poster's views from another thread, confirms my opinion:
> Speaking as someone who has 
> been doing AI programming professionally for many years, you won't be 
> too surprised if I rate the AI knowledge as the more worthwhile.
 ...
> what have you learned 
> about behaviour, intelligence or the architecture of mind? 

My background is 'hard science' not psychology, HCI, cog.sci;
 YOU-folks should lead the extension of poplogs IDE, not me.

> Prolog systems are typically 
> unsuitable since their IDEs are impoverished -..

 This writer correctly acknowledges that the power of the IDE is 
 very important.
 
 ved is good, but it can be (easily I guess) extended to give a
 more powerfull IDE.
 Nowhere else will you find the ideal conditions to make a killer IDE:
  1. contributors with psychology, HCI, cog.sci training,
  2. an already very flexible/extendable underlying software.
  
  Lets do it !!
  
  Thanks,
  
  -- Chris Glur.
  
  
  PS. the fact that facilities, like 'code folding/hiding' can be added
  incrementally, is further reason why it should be done - soon.