Hi Doug,
What's the best way to trace pilog?
Pilog clauses can indeed be traced.
Unfortunately, I don't find a good description at the moment. The
reference of '?' (and of 'prove' which is the internal machinery of the
query front end '?') just briefly mentions it:
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 09:44:22PM -0700, Doug Snead wrote:
(@ prinl @X is (- @X))
as a rule clause as a debugging print.
Yes, that's also a way, and sometimes more helpful than tracing.
I recommend 'msg' instead of the 'prin' function family, because it
outputs to standard error and
--- On Sun, 6/26/11, Doug Snead semaphore_2...@yahoo.com wrote:
(be isAtom (@A) (not (equal @A (Neg @W)))
(or (equal @A (And @W1 @W2)))
(or (equal @A (If @W1 @W2)))
(or (equal @A
(Is @W1 @W2)))
(or (equal @A (Or @W1 @W2)))
(or (equal @A (some @X @W)))
(or
Thanks Alex.
We'll see what I'll manage come up with.
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Alexander Burger a...@software-lab.dewrote:
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
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 01:44:33AM -0700, Doug Snead wrote:
(It looks not so bad, once I studied golog_swi.pl a bit more. Some loose ends
still, but promising. - Doug)
Cool. Bravo!
--
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe
Thanks Alex!The more I look at it, the more I like pilog for golog because
golog uses prolog-ish backtracking so heavily. When I look at this attempt to
make a lua golog for example
http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2010/2631/pdf/10081.Ferrein.2631.pdf ,
I think a picolisp/pilog
This is exactly what I was looking for, thanks!
--- On Sun, 6/26/11, Alexander Burger a...@software-lab.de wrote:
It works by simply passing the names of the clauses you
want to trace right after the '?' (i.e the ['sym' ..] arguments).
... With tracing
: (? append (append (a b c) @X (a b
