Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register

Groups > comp.lang.prolog > #14631

Payed Ass-Lickers all around (Was: Lets see what the "experts" say)

Show all headers | View raw

Hi,

An then you have the poor guy who asked
the question, and doesn't have a single useful
take away. Possibly anyway a payed Ass-Licker:

Thank you all for the comments!
https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog/discussions/3004#discussioncomment-13707072

Scryer Prolog is totalla fake nonsense.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> Well Ulrich Neumerkel is of course the biggest
> quack of all as usual:
> 
>  > > order of clause can only influence termination properties
>  > This depends on your definition of termination. There is universal
>  > termination and (much rarer) existential termination.
>  >
>  > In a pure, monotonic program, order of clauses does not even 
> influence > universal termination. That is, a goal G_0, false will 
> terminate in
>  > the very same way regardless of the clause order. (For a goal G_0,
>  > false both universal and existential termination are the same.)
> 
> https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog/discussions/3004#discussioncomment-13704812 
> 
> 
> Complete idiots, nothing to do with terminations. DCGs
> that consume characters do anyway terminate. What is he talking about?
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Woa! This nonsense really made my day:
>>
>> https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog/discussions/3004
>>
>> It starts with, where somebody "tried" a declarative DCG
>> using constraint logic programming:
>>
>> number_tail(0, 0) --> [].
>> number_tail(Number, DigitsCount) -->
>>    ("," | ""),
>>    digit(Digit),
>>    number_tail(Digits, RestDigitsCount),
>>    {
>>      DigitsCount #= RestDigitsCount + 1,
>>      Number #= Digit * 10 ^ RestDigitsCount + Digits
>>    }.
>>
>> He then noticed that its not deterministic. And since
>> it is not deterministic, clause ordering changes the
>> result when onced via once/1.
>>
>> LoL
>>
>> If DCGs had a cut, one would any way do:
>>
>> number_tail(Number, DigitsCount) -->
>>    ("," | ""),
>>    digit(Digit), !,
>>    number_tail(Digits, RestDigitsCount),
>>    {
>>      DigitsCount #= RestDigitsCount + 1,
>>      Number #= Digit * 10 ^ RestDigitsCount + Digits
>>    }.
>> number_tail(0, 0) --> [].
>>
>> Push the determinancy into the DCG. Otherwise you have
>> an explosion of choice points, and a lot of things go
>> totally wrong.
>>
>> But the new DCG standard has no cut (!)/2.
> 

Back to comp.lang.prolog | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Scryer Prolog totally clueless how DCGs work Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-09 11:33 +0200
  Lets see what the "experts" say (Was: Scryer Prolog totally clueless how DCGs work) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-09 11:36 +0200
    Payed Ass-Lickers all around (Was: Lets see what the "experts" say) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-09 11:38 +0200
      Its all about the money, not about quality (Was: Payed Ass-Lickers all around) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-09 11:42 +0200
        A case of dumbification by committee membership? (Was: Its all about the money, not about quality) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-09 20:01 +0200
    The stack overflow user by the name false (Was: Lets see what the "experts" say) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-15 11:50 +0200
      The choice is a little arbitrary from one angle (Re: The stack overflow user by the name false) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-15 11:59 +0200
  Does Scryer Prolog have all tricks up its sleeves? [Occurs Check] (Was: Scryer Prolog totally clueless how DCGs work) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-04 19:47 +0200

csiph-web