Re: Challenging problem
- From: Markus Triska <triska@xxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 09:57:46 +0200
Hi Bart!
Bart Demoen schrieb:
Maybe I am looking in the wrong place, or maybe I don't get some of your contribution(s): I can't see it (neither above nor any place else). Would you mind reposting your [other] interpretation ? Thanks.
Sure, the salient part is: "I think it didn't." The [other] interpretation is therefore that the nameless entity didn't arrive at that conclusion.
Is the fact that you mention SWI-Prolog explicitly in your message important ?
Yes.
Is the "default settings" part important ?
Yes.
Does the same drawback exist for the period/2 predicate - for a range of smaller integers [hint: try the smallish number 100097] ?
It is not the same drawback.
Are we talking here about a space/time trade-off, an inherent complexity issue, a limitation of SWI-Prolog (shared by any other Prolog systems perhaps) ... ?
Yes.
All the best, Markus. .
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Challenging problem
- From: Bart Demoen
- Re: Challenging problem
- From: Nameless
- Re: Challenging problem
- References:
- Re: Challenging problem
- From: Nameless
- Re: Challenging problem
- From: Bart Demoen
- Re: Challenging problem
- From: Markus Triska
- Re: Challenging problem
- From: Bart Demoen
- Re: Challenging problem
- From: Markus Triska
- Re: Challenging problem
- From: Bart Demoen
- Re: Challenging problem
- Prev by Date: Re: Challenging problem
- Next by Date: Re: Challenging problem
- Previous by thread: Re: Challenging problem
- Next by thread: Re: Challenging problem
- Index(es):