Re: Swarm technology preview

[Marcus G. Daniels]

>>>>> "RP" == Rod Price <address@hidden> writes:

RP> You don't have to tell
RP> the compiler what type your function is, it just does it on its
RP> own.  A function which is not well- typed is almost always a
RP> function that doesn't work.

So there seems to be a spectrum of options.  From a simple functional
cleaned-up interface to the existing Swarm features (e.g. the XML demo),
all the way to a purely declarative, semantically rich compiler that
targets an API like the current Swarm virtual machine (say, providing
multi-level scheduling per declarative partially ordered set invariants).

I guess my main concern is whether the practical domain-specific Swarm
modelers, and the theoretical computer science and modeling folks can
find enough common problems to maintain interest in a completely new
(and comparatively dense and abstract) modeling language.

In principle, you're preaching to the converted.  In practice, I think
the Swarm project needs to work harder on usability and accessibility.
Maybe the goals are compatible, I don't know...


                  ==================================
   Swarm-Modelling is for discussion of Simulation and Modelling techniques
   esp. using Swarm.  For list administration needs (esp. [un]subscribing),
   please send a message to <address@hidden> with "help" in the
   body of the message.
                  ==================================