Re: [Toss-devel] Imperative Rule Representation

[Lukasz S. <luk...@gm...>]

I'm sorry for not checking the paper right now, but I think that rules
based on adding/deleting are already fully implemented (including a
nice syntax), with *a lot* of flexibility (for example, with compiling
defined relations into structure relations). Providing rules by
structures is just an option.

On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 11:47 PM, Lukasz Kaiser <luk...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I recently learned about YAGI from the paper below,
>   http://uoa.academia.edu/StavrosVassos/Papers/1674325/Action-Based_Imperative_Programming_with_YAGI
> and I looked at our rules in Toss and started thinking
> that it could be more intuitive to represent directly
> what needs to be added to and removed from relations,
> instead of having these pairs of structures as we do now.
> For example, in Tic-Tac-Toe instead of the current RULE Cross:
>   [a | P:1 {} | - ] -> [a | P (a) | - ] emb Q, P pre not WinQ()
> we could just write
>   RULE Cross(a): +P(a) pre not P(a) and not Q(a) and not WinQ()
> Or maybe even use "action" instead of "rule"?
> This should be really easy to implement as our compiled
> rule representation basically is just this: what to remove,
> what to add, and pre. Maybe we should also have "new(e)"
> and "del(e)" to add new elements and delete some of them?
> What do you think about it? (Lukasz: is this what you have
> been suggesting to me for some time? I hope you are not
> angry that I need so much time to grow up to your advise!)
>
> Best!
>
> Lukasz