I downloaded the source from gprolog.org and compiled it. No more problem with the new binary (1.3.1). I installed the previous version directly with apt (from an Ubuntu repository), may be it was a 32 bits version and that's the reason of the problem.
Zyx wrote: > > Hi, > I've got inconsistent results with gnu Prolog, with a simple nqueens > program: > > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% > queens(N,L):- > length(L,N),fd_domain(L,1,N) , > fd_all_different(L),correct(L), > fd_labelingff(L). > > correct([]). > correct([X|L]):- > safe_diag_fd(X,L,1),correct(L). > > safe_diag_fd(X,[],_). > safe_diag_fd(X,[Y|L],D):- > Y-X #\= D, > X-Y #\= D, > D1 is D+1, > safe_diag_fd(X,L,D1). > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% > > For queens(32,L) , I have duplicate values in the list, and sometimes -1 > in the following answers: > | ?- queens(32,L). > L = > [1,3,5,16,15,4,10,7,13,16,22,15,6,17,19,21,8,25,2,16,27,28,9,18,20,14,11,13,10,2,2,12] > ? > yes > | ?- queens(32,L),sort0(L). > L = > [1,2,2,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,10,11,12,13,13,14,15,15,16,16,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,25,27,28] > ? ; > L = > [-1,1,2,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,10,11,12,13,13,14,15,15,16,16,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,25,27,28] > ? ; > L = > [-1,1,2,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,10,11,12,13,13,14,15,15,16,16,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,25,27,28] > ? > > I'm running gnuProlog 1.3.0 under Ubuntu 10.04 / 64 bits. Don't seem to > have the same problem on another computer under Debian Lenny. > > Any suggestion? > Regards, > Steve. > > > -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Inconsistent-result-with-GnuProlo---Ubuntu-10.04-64-bits-tp29276860p29276985.html Sent from the Gnu - Prolog - Bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Bug-prolog mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-prolog
