I'm aware of the existing implementation on github, but as a translation from a Scheme implementation it's not very idiomatic. I have a much simpler implementation written, but I'm not sure of one of the test results. What is the expected output of the following tweaked example from the paper [1]:
> (defi ne ( fives x) (disj (≡ x 5) .(λg (s/c) (λ$ () (.( fives x) .s/c))).)) > (defi ne (sixes x) (disj (≡ x 6) (λg (s/c) (λ$ () ((sixes x) s/c))))) > (defi ne fives-xor-sixes (call/fresh (λ (x) (conj ( fives x) (sixes x))))) > (fi ves-xor-sixes empty-state) This is the fives-and-sixes example, replacing a disj with conj. I would expect this to produce no results, is that correct? Sandro [1] http://webyrd.net/scheme-2013/papers/HemannMuKanren2013.pdf -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "minikanren" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minikanren. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
