Re: Challenging problem
Markus Triska wrote:
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.
My English language capabalities let me down from time to time ...
Does stating "Nameless did not arrive at that [particular] conclusion"
amount to offering "another" interpretation of what Nameless wrote ?
Is the fact that you mention SWI-Prolog explicitly in your message
important ?
Yes.
Is the "default settings" part important ?
Yes.
Is it too difficult to reset the default settings of SWI-Prolog ?
Just ask, and you will get help.
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.
Aha, different drawbacks ... why just talk about one drawback in
particular when there is a more balanced view of things ?
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.
And surely it would have been too informative to mention in the first
place.
Cheers
Bart Demoen
.
