On Sun, 2007-09-02 at 08:24 -0500, Bill Wood wrote: > As to whether Prolog is "dead" or not, it depends on your definition of > "dead". Three years ago (not ten!) I made my living maintaining and > developing a large application written in Prolog. That was actually an > interesting experience, since one of the performance drivers was speed. > As a result code was being perpetually tuned toward less > non-determinism. I've been following the discussion with interest, and I wonder what heppened to Gõdel, which promised to be a successor of Prolog. See the link for features, but http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~bowers/goedel.html was last updated in 1995. Does anybody know more?
Hans van Thiel [snip] > > To Jerzy's point -- I strongly believe that learning a language like > Prolog is a good idea for two reasons -- first, it adds another tool to > the programmer's toolkit, and second, it enlarges the programmer's view > of ways to think about solving problems. > > -- Bill Wood > > > _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
