Blog

The next problem: circular reasoning

Jul 8, 2018 | | Say something

So my seemingly once-a-year work on developing this project is beginning again.  Now the issue is: how do I handle circular logic?  In this post, I’ll see if I can figure it out, because right now I have no idea. Say we have a statement: If @1 is A, then @1 is B.  This necessarily […more]

Running!

Jun 7, 2017 | | Say something

So it’s a few minutes after June 6 ETD, but otherwise as promised the site is up and running supposedly.  Had to do some last minute hacking because apparently I can no longer upload Perl modules on my host (am I the last person still using Perl?) Updates: Giant logic rework.  Really, a ton of […more]

Not-quite-working live version soon?

May 21, 2017 | | Say something

So the state of the project is this – it at least sort of works, right now, on my local machine.  There are things that I thought were broken that strangely now seem to be less broken, and it could be that the last time I tested I just didn’t test right, or I didn’t […more]

Breakthrough

Mar 18, 2017 | | Say something

It’s been almost a year since I started my “massive overhaul” and it finally looks like I’ve solved the “easy version of the hard problem”.  What  this means is where there’s single statements like “then @1 is better than @2”  without a conjunction in there anywhere, the system can at least partially tell how that […more]

And another roadblock (or two)

Nov 24, 2016 | | Say something

To keep myself updated next time I start working on this again, here’s what’s currently broken. I won’t be able to do much work on this for at least a couple of weeks, so further progress will be a while. – Transferability logic – assumption that only need to worry about matching variables was horribly […more]

Why Marcellus isn’t actually jealous of Vincent

Aug 6, 2016 | | Say something

While debugging my current solution (which by the way, is “complete” but has failed some tests and I’m in the process of figuring out why) I noticed a problem with one of my logical test cases.  It’s based on a classic prolog-based test case (one used as an example in SWISH), and goes something like […more]

Progress

May 22, 2016 | | Say something

April 4 wasn’t that long ago, but it feels like a long time – I’ve spent quite a bit of energy on continuing the “massive overhaul”, but also taken some breaks and trips in the same time period. So where am I?  A bit over halfway done with the “hard part”.  And hopefully, more than […more]

Massive overhaul underway

Apr 4, 2016 | | Say something

So in my last post I said I’d need to change how the principles are stored…turns out it’s more like completely rehaul how all the data is stored, and that means completely rehauling the code as well – all while trying to solve the original problem I’ve been trying to fix in the first place. […more]

Nevermind that whole Prolog thing

Jan 10, 2016 | | Say something

So it’s been a while, but I’m back on development, and still stuck on the transference problem that I wrote about in prior posts.  This post is largely a reminder to myself and any spambots listening that Prolog is not a solution to the system’s woes. I honestly expected that I could just create an […more]

Back to prolog

Apr 29, 2015 | | Say something

If there’s one thing 3 years of law school and 5 years of building a legal career has taught me, it’s the fallacy of sunk costs.  I’ve put a lot of effort into the logic engine of this site – and I’ve even thought it was complete.  But this variable transference problem has led me […more]