Re: Syllabus for Seed Developer Qualifications [WAS Re: Some considerations about AGI]

From: Richard Loosemore (rpwl@lightlink.com)
Date: Thu Feb 02 2006 - 07:33:33 MST

• Next message: Richard Loosemore: "Re: Languages for AGI [WAS Re: Syllabus for Seed Developer Qualifications...]"
• Previous message: Kevin Osborne: "Re: Syllabus for Seed Developer Qualifications [WAS Re: Some considerations about AGI]"
• In reply to: Patrick Crenshaw: "Re: Syllabus for Seed Developer Qualifications [WAS Re: Some considerations about AGI]"
• Next in thread: Patrick Crenshaw: "Re: Syllabus for Seed Developer Qualifications [WAS Re: Some considerations about AGI]"
• Reply: Patrick Crenshaw: "Re: Syllabus for Seed Developer Qualifications [WAS Re: Some considerations about AGI]"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Patrick Crenshaw wrote:
[snip]
> Besides, I don't think anyone who thinks the OCaML way of doing things
> is unnatural is going to be able to contribute to an AGI project
> anyway.

I've got ask...

Why, exactly?

Richard Loosemore

• Next message: Richard Loosemore: "Re: Languages for AGI [WAS Re: Syllabus for Seed Developer Qualifications...]"
• Previous message: Kevin Osborne: "Re: Syllabus for Seed Developer Qualifications [WAS Re: Some considerations about AGI]"
• In reply to: Patrick Crenshaw: "Re: Syllabus for Seed Developer Qualifications [WAS Re: Some considerations about AGI]"
• Next in thread: Patrick Crenshaw: "Re: Syllabus for Seed Developer Qualifications [WAS Re: Some considerations about AGI]"
• Reply: Patrick Crenshaw: "Re: Syllabus for Seed Developer Qualifications [WAS Re: Some considerations about AGI]"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:55 MDT