Re: in praise of tabling


"Bart Demoen" <bmd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1114196820.313867@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Geoffrey Summerhayes wrote:
>
>> So, adding auto_table makes you feel secure?
>
> Yes. Does that make you feel like adding auto_table ?
> (I hope we can get out of this Elisa mode some day)
>

Sure does! Oops, my prolog doesn't have tabling. Let
me just ask my boss if we can switch. He doesn't seem
pleased with the idea of rewriting all the implementation
dependent code for some reason, talked about man-hours
and money. Sometimes I think these business types just
don't care about pretty code, just the profit line.

Well, without tabling, I'm screwed there is nothing else
I can do to speed up the code. Especially after your
argument that refactoring code is bad because it might
introduce bugs.

Bugs are bad.

OTOH, am I to assume from the fact that you didn't
provide a concrete counter-example of the code giving
an incorrect result that, at least in this instance, I
may have blindly stumbled, into a correct transformation?

Naaah, I must be wrong.

I don't have anything against tabling, but just putting
auto_table into code is no guarantee of a speed-up,
anything with side-effects, whether they influence the
results or not, have to turn it off, or the tabling
algorithm is incorrect. You cannot skip the side-effect.

Phew, enough non-Eliza for you?

--
Geoff



.