Re: Help: Multiple Proof Trees
- From: Duncan Patton <campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 23:45:00 GMT
On 30 Aug 2005 15:32:37 GMT
Jan Wielemaker <jan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Meta-interpreters are more complicated than we teach beginners. The
> above only gets pretty if we define clause/2 to return clauses for
> user-defined public predicates and failure for any other predicate.
>
> Cheers --- Jan
This is so. I had chance to play with YAP a short time back and found
some differences of this kind disconcerting... the sort of thing that
I would call a "bug" but are in fact (as Bart most tersely pointed out)
acceptable behavioral differences that are meaningful at a the "meta"
level.
Dhu
--
???????????????????????????????????????
Can't get good help?
Contact Fubar the Hack: fubar AT neotext.ca
Area code seven eight zero, Exchange four six six, Local zero one zero nine
Highland terms, Canadian workmanship.
All persons named herein are purely fictional victims
of the Canidian Bagle Breeder's Association.
Save the Bagle!
Sun Ðhu
???????????????????????????????????????
.
- References:
- Help: Multiple Proof Trees
- From: Pasquale Renna
- Re: Help: Multiple Proof Trees
- From: Bart Demoen
- Re: Help: Multiple Proof Trees
- From: Jan Wielemaker
- Re: Help: Multiple Proof Trees
- From: Bart Demoen
- Re: Help: Multiple Proof Trees
- From: Jan Wielemaker
- Help: Multiple Proof Trees
- Prev by Date: Re: ...Thanks for recommending that book!
- Next by Date: Re: I now realize WHY my 'consistency check' was pointless: CLP.
- Previous by thread: Re: Help: Multiple Proof Trees
- Next by thread: Bug on XSB prolog???
- Index(es):