Hi Doug,
I think a picolisp/pilog -based golog might be a better approach than
using lua for this, at least.
Indeed. I did a quick test, and it seems that PicoLisp is also faster
than Lua (though it seems that concerning memory footprint, Lua might be
better).
Cheers,
- Alex
--
UNSUBSCRIBE:
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
Burger a...@software-lab.de
Subject: Re: tracing pilog
To: picolisp@software-lab.de
Date: Sunday, June 26, 2011, 12:31 AM
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
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
