Re: GNU prolog is not so reliable as SWI-prolog
- From: Richard Hagen <nemo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 04:41:06 +1000
In article <1146307439.848327.117840@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
newser.bbs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
OK ,
I just finished a bilion case ,ie treat(1000000000), in the SWI-prolog.
That is very enough for any practical problem I'll encounter.
Thanks for the SWI-prolog develop team.
As to GNU prolog ? Just forget it !
It's obvious from your posts that you have no idea about Prolog. I
suspect that you know little or nothing about computing, and little or
nothing about programming languages. Please refrain from posting here
until you've bothered to read and understand something about what
you're posting about.
Did you bother to read the GNU manual before making your ignorant
recommendation? You certainly didn't bother looking at the SWI
documentation before posting here.
Did you even bother to think about what might be going on in a program
execution -- in Prolog or any other language -- that has a recursive
depth of 1 000 000 000 calls?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: GNU prolog is not so reliable as SWI-prolog
- From: newser . bbs
- Re: GNU prolog is not so reliable as SWI-prolog
- References:
- GNU prolog is not so reliable as SWI-prolog
- From: newser . bbs
- Re: GNU prolog is not so reliable as SWI-prolog
- From: newser . bbs
- GNU prolog is not so reliable as SWI-prolog
- Prev by Date: Re: GNU prolog is not so reliable as SWI-prolog
- Next by Date: Re: GNU prolog is not so reliable as SWI-prolog
- Previous by thread: Re: GNU prolog is not so reliable as SWI-prolog
- Next by thread: Re: GNU prolog is not so reliable as SWI-prolog
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|