Hi Cle,

> it seemed to me, that only the last two rules of 'fact1' remained! All  
> the other were forgotten.
> Now I wonder, if this is intended behavior?

Oh, yes, sorry! This is indeed the intended behavior, and I have to
explain the reasons:

In PicoLisp, a source file should always be written in such a way that
it can be changed at any time, and then 'load'ed. Then the new
definitions etc. should be manifest in the system.

This works well for 'setq', 'de' and other functions that replace the
value of a symbol. 'de' issues a message when the value was changed, and
everything is OK.

It gets problematic, however, when other structures are modified. For
example, methods (defined with 'dm') put the definition into a list in
current class symbol's value cell. When an existing method is replaced
with a new definition, a message like in the case of 'de' is issued and
the new method definition is stored.

But when a method definition was simply removed from the source file, or
commented out, no change will happen in the class. So here we have a
discrepancy between the source file and the interpreter state.
Fortunately, this is usually not such a big problem, because a deleted
method will probably not do much harm (it will, however, if it overrides
a method in a parent class).

To be sure, it is safer to start the interpreter from scratch if method
defintions were removed.

For Pilog rules, the situation is worse. If a rule is just removed from
a source file, the in-memory state will stay non-modified as in the case
of the method. But the fact whether a rule is there or not is rather
critical for the behavior of a Pilog program.

To avoid such problems, Pilog obeys the following rule: Whenever a new
rule is detected, it is assumed that the definition of the previous rule
finished, and a new rule starts. Then all possibly old definitions get
cleared, and the following definitions are collected into that rule.

This makes it safe to 'load' and re-'load' a source file as often as

But, if a source file contains:

   (be fact1 (...))
   (be fact1 (...))

   (be fact2 (...))
   (be fact2 (...))

   (be fact1 (...))
   (be fact1 (...))

then the fact1 definitions preceding those of fact2 will be lost, and
only the final two remain. Pilog believes that 'fact1' is re-loaded.

In summary, the assumption is that all rule definitions for a given
symbol are always consecutive in the source. Though this is a bit
confusing at the first sight, I think it is a quite practical

- Alex
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe

Reply via email to