travisa

Apparently, intelligence is to deliberately misunderstand the point being made

The linked documentation in the first paragraph is confusing. It sets things in `context`, then calls `supertramp()`, which doesn't even use `context.user_index` or `my_custom_allocator()` specifically, which is not defined in the example? Are we to assume that `new()` somehow makes use of `context.allocator` and `context.user_index`? It goes on to explain that new(x) is also `new(x, context.allocator)`, but never explains the relevance of `context.user_index` No wonder people "misunderstand"

For those of us not up to date with the state of the art, can you provide references? Very interested!

Perhaps someone has a system that evolves bots by mutation, and these patterns are just the effects of 'bad' mutations. I'm not serious either, though.

As someone interested in compiler technology, I was happy to see a simple example of a tracing JIT in LLVM. See: http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/3851

Just because something is turing complete doesn't mean it is also effective at managing complexity to whatever degree. Any computation that can be expressed in Python can be equivalently expressed in Brainfuck, but one will be much shorter and easier to understand.

Instead, he seems to be asking for a revolutionary solution to the concurrency problem (mixing synchronous and asynchronous execution). That's all well and good, but he'll have to find the back of the line :)