aipl VS logseq

AIPL is an "Array-Inspired Pipeline Language", a tiny DSL in Python to make it easier to explore and experiment with AI pipelines.

https://github.com/saulpw/aipl

When you want to run some prompts through an LLM over a dataset, with some preprocessing and/or chaining prompts together, AIPL makes it much easier than writing a Python script.

Yes! This is why I started working on AIPL. The scripts are much more like recipes (linear, contained in a single-file, self-evident even to people who don't know the language). For instance, here's a multi-level summarizer of a webpage: https://github.com/saulpw/aipl/blob/develop/examples/summari...

The goal is to capture all that knowledge that langchain has, into consistent legos that you can combine and parameterize with the prompts, without all the complexity and boilerplate of langchain, nor having to learn all the Python libraries and their APIs. Perfect for prototypes and experiments (like a notebook, as you suggest), and then if you find something that really works, you can hand-off a single text file to an engineer and they can make it work in a production environment.

I agree, and that's why I've been working on AIPL[0]. Our first v0.1 release should be in the next few days. https://github.com/saulpw/aipl

It's basically just a simple scripting language with array semantics and inline prompt construction, and you can drop into Python any time you like.

I also was underwhelmed by langchain, and started implementing my own "AIPL" (Array-Inspired Pipeline Language) which turns these "chains" into straightforward, linear scripts. It's very early days but already it feels like the right direction for experimenting with this stuff. (I'm looking for collaborators if anyone is interested!)

https://github.com/saulpw/aipl

Logseq support via our Logseq Plugin

Sorry, but _what exactly_ «it seems to do» from your point of view?

My «second brain» now is almost 300Mb of text, pictures, sound files, PDF and other stuff. As I already mentioned, it contains tables, mathematical formulae, sheet music, cross-references, code samples, UML diagrams and graphs in Graphviz format. It is versioned, indexed by local search engine, analyzed by AI assistant and shared between many computers and mobile devices. And (last but not least) it works: it allows me to solve my tasks way more faster than with the assistant of external, non-personalized tools (like ChatGPT, StackExchange or Google).

I know no tools for all this tasks except org-mode. Well, maybe Evernote in the 2010-s was something similar — but with less features, with more bugs and with worse interface.

Personal note-taking _is_ a complex task per se (well, at least for someone like typical HN visitor). I've seen many note-taking tools, that were ridiculously featureless, stupid and inconvenient because they were _not_ complex enough.

> Sure if one wants to do emacs-gardening it is fine.

1)You can use org-mode outside Emacs. See for example Logseq (https://logseq.com/), organice (https://organice.200ok.ch/) or EasyOrg.

2)Org-mode works in Emacs out of the box, you don't need any «emacs-gardening» to use org-mode.

3)The term «Emacs-gardening» itself sound a bit like hate-speech for me. The complexity of Emacs customization is overrated, mostly due to opinions of people who never used Emacs or used it in the previous millennium.

Obsidian is great.

For those looking for an open source alternative (or don't want to pay the Obsidian fees for professional usage) check out Logseq: https://logseq.com/

For an opensource alternative to Obsidian checkout Logseq (1). I spent a while thinking obsidian was opensource out of my own ignorance and was disappointed when I learned it was not.

1: https://logseq.com/

I use logseq to keep journal of my daily work.

While Emacs and Org mode can certainly be used for this (and, when they can't, you can always inject little python/js scripts in your emacs config to take care of specific things), I'd also recommend you take a look at Logseq.