Thanks Alex!!! We have golog in pilog. Er, I think :-) If not we're pretty dang close. Still trying to get the simple elevator example going from "Knowledge in Action" as a test. http://www.cs.toronto.edu/cogrobo/kia/simpleElevator http://books.google.com/books?q=%22proc%28goFloor%22 etc.
After golog, maybe indigolog ? With miniPicoLisp at 100 to 150k (depending on platform, build options, etc.) and with pilog + golog loaded, it has to be the smallest footprint golog (with a respectable prolog and lisp under the hood), around. Might be right for embedded systems, I'm thinking. Cheers, Doug --- On Thu, 6/30/11, Alexander Burger <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Alexander Burger <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: pilog: unification in variables that are clauses > To: [email protected] > Date: Thursday, June 30, 2011, 11:55 PM > Hi Doug, > > the following works: > > (be a (3)) > > (be foo @C > (2 -> @C) ) > > > : (? (foo (a @Z))) > @Z=3 > > -> NIL > > I spied what 'call/1' is doing ;-) That number magic with > '2' is a bit > tricky, I'm never sure what level to pick. Basically it > tells the > interpreter with which level it should unify (here, the > level outside of > 'foo'). > > > Actually, you could also use > > (be foo (@C) > (2 cons (-> @C)) ) > > but this needs additional consing for the expression to > match, so I > would avoid it. It depends on what else is done with '@C'. > > Cheers, > - Alex > -- > UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe > -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe
