Hi Henrik,

> When it comes to examining arbitrary lists can Pilog be a good (as in terse)
> and fast fit?

I'm not really convinced. My opinion is that Prolog is good at only one
task: Search with backtracking.

For simple pattern matches, direct Lisp code is usually simpler (and
faster). With 'member', 'assoc', 'find' or 'pick' for simple cases, and
'match' in general.

> Take the following list for example: ("one" "two" ("items" "knife" "tent"
> "hook" "boots") ("key1" "yes") ("key2" "no"))
> We want to know if all of the following are true or not:
> 1.) It contains "one".

   (member "one" L)
   (match '(@A "one" @Z) L)

Note that for match it is advisable to 'use' the variables, i.e.

   (use (@A @Z)
      (match '(@A "one" @Z) L) )

For simplicity I omit the 'use' in the following examples.

> 2.) It contains ("key1" "yes"), i.e. a member of the list is a in itself a
> list with "key1" in the car and "yes" as the second element. If it makes

   (member '("key1" "yes") L)
   (match '(@A ("key1" "yes") @C) L)
   (match '(@A ("key1" @B) @C) L)

> 3.) It contains a member list with "items" in the car and both "boots" and
> "tent" in the cdr.

         (match '(@A ("items" @B) @Z) L)
         (member "boots" @B)
         (member "tent" @B) )

      (let? X (assoc "items" L)
         (and (member "boots" X) (member "tent" X)) )

               (= "items" (car L))
               (member "boots" (cdr L))
               (member "tent" (cdr L)) ) )
         L )

> ((? "one") (? "key1" "yes") (? "items" "boots" "tent") (! "two"))
> The last ! there should mean that the list can not contain "two" which

One of the (sub)clauses above could also contain something like

   (not (member "two" X))

Or you can do a deep search

   (not (fish '((X) (= "two" X)) L))

- Alex
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

Reply via email to