Re: Storing data and code in a Db with LISP-like interface

Markus Triska wrote:
> Alvin Ryder wrote:
>
> >
> > Nick's point is correct, pure prolog does not answer those types of
> >
>
> Nick didn't make that point.
>
> > practical prolog's
>
> findall/3 is part of ISO Prolog.

Markus, I was just politely trying to accommodate you both and I'm happy to leave it at that.

But as a reply to you, I am not sure if we are being pedantic or precise? If pedantic then I'm not interesting in replying but if precise then I'd like to reply. Let me assume you are like me and value high precision, therefore I'll reply with...

Nick used the phrase "traditional prolog" and I switched it for "pure prolog": There is decades worth of literature that equates the two as being more or less the same thing and at any rate it refers to the early prolog which is based only on first-order predicate logic which thereby excludes the second-order logic required for predicates like "findall", "bagof" and "setof" which require a predicate as an argument.

You are correct in stating that this is trivial (with ISO prolog and all) but Nick is correct in stating that this was not the case with "traditional prolog" or as I said "pure prolog".

At any rate I think we agree, Neo's problems can easily be emulated with modern (ISO or otherwise) Prologs.

Cheers ;-) Received on Fri Apr 28 2006 - 07:14:21 CEST