I plan to stick to Hy, but I’ll make the versioning clearer in the future.
If there’s two weeks, that should leave enough time for making & checking alternate implementations, as well as clarifying any unclear parts. (I never fully understood the details of the selection algorithm (and it seems there were bugs in it until quite late), but given a week for focusing just on that, I hope that should work out alright.)
I’m optimizing for features, not speed.
No complaints here, that’s the only sane approach for research and other software like this.
However there’s other bits of the code too (like random selection from sets) which might vary from one implementation to another.
Compared to e.g. trying to get the Mersenne Twister (which I think is still Python’s default RNG?) either linked to or re-implemented in some other obscure language, that’s a trivial task. I don’t expect problems there, as long as those functions actually use the specified RNG and not internally refer to the language’s default.
Oh also, on genome formats: I’ve been doing quite a bit of stuff with domain specific languages / PLT stuff, as well as genetic algorithms and other swarm optimization approaches before. If you have any ideas that you want to bounce off someone or have some cool idea for some complex genome format that looks like it might be too much work, feel free to ping me—I might be able to help! (Ideally in a sufficiently abstract / altered way that I can still participate, but if need be, I’d give that up for a year too.)
Oh also, on genome formats: I’ve been doing quite a bit of stuff with domain specific languages / PLT stuff, as well as genetic algorithms and other swarm optimization approaches before. If you have any ideas that you want to bounce off someone or have some cool idea for some complex genome format that looks like it might be too much work, feel free to ping me—I might be able to help! (Ideally in a sufficiently abstract / altered way that I can still participate, but if need be, I’d give that up for a year too.)
If there’s two weeks, that should leave enough time for making & checking alternate implementations, as well as clarifying any unclear parts. (I never fully understood the details of the selection algorithm (and it seems there were bugs in it until quite late), but given a week for focusing just on that, I hope that should work out alright.)
No complaints here, that’s the only sane approach for research and other software like this.
Compared to e.g. trying to get the Mersenne Twister (which I think is still Python’s default RNG?) either linked to or re-implemented in some other obscure language, that’s a trivial task. I don’t expect problems there, as long as those functions actually use the specified RNG and not internally refer to the language’s default.
Oh also, on genome formats: I’ve been doing quite a bit of stuff with domain specific languages / PLT stuff, as well as genetic algorithms and other swarm optimization approaches before. If you have any ideas that you want to bounce off someone or have some cool idea for some complex genome format that looks like it might be too much work, feel free to ping me—I might be able to help! (Ideally in a sufficiently abstract / altered way that I can still participate, but if need be, I’d give that up for a year too.)
I love this forum/community so much.