Alexander Burger wrote:
> Hi Cle,
>   

Hi Alex,

(...)


>> Yeah! I like this a lot better :-D That prove you again being the guru
>> and me the disciple :-)
>>     
>
> Not at all! I must say your discovery of using 'fill' here is ingenious.
> A nice coincidence of Lisp pattern variables versus Pilog variables.
>   

thank you for the flowers :-) But I had thought you did the Lisp pattern
variables looking like Pilog ones on purpose to just allow that trick :-O
> I would suggest two changes:
>
> 1. '@Var' is not always a variable, but may be any kind of pattern. So
>    let's better call it '@Pat'.
>   

Wholeheartly agree! First it was only a variable. But later it was
mutating to a pattern. So you are totally right here. Like I did not
thought to use 'solve' again after finding a solution, I also did not
think for re-check the variable names afterwards :-(

> 2. (val '@Var) is a tautology. Just @Var (or @Pat) should suffice. With
>    that, we would get
>
>    (be findall (@Pat @P @Res)
>       (@Res solve
>          (-> @P)
>          (or @Pat (fill (-> @Pat))) ) )
>
> What do you think?
>   

I like this even more! It is already builtin in my application code! :-D
Thank you for these improvements :-)

> Cheers,
> - Alex
>   

Ciao,
cle.

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

Reply via email to