Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.prolog > #14854

Julio Di Egidio has never heard of unification (Was: How SWI-Prolog went down hills)

Show all headers | View raw

Hi,

Lets not forget that SWI-Prolog is now doomed
to have professional moron Julio Di Egidio
on board. Lets see what he says about dicts:

  - The syntax <atom>{<key>:<any>,...} for “structs”
     (i.e. where the name is the functor name);
  - The syntax <var>{<key>:<any>,...} for attributed vars.

LoL, I guess he has never heard of unification.
The beautiful thing about SWI-Prolog dicts is
that you can use Variable Tags for matching.

This here works:

?- X = foo{bar:123,baz:abc},
    Y = Tag{bar:Value1,baz:Value2},
    X = Y.
X = Y, Y = foo{bar:123, baz:abc},
Tag = foo,
Value1 = 123,
Value2 = abc.

Such things might even be in use in the wild, like
for example in a CSV reader , or who knows what. The
only common thing between SWI-Prolog dicts and

attributed variables is that usually the state of
attributed variable is organized as a dict. But
the variable tags in SWI-Prolog are not automatically

attributed variables. On the other hand some Prolog
systems provide SSU (Single Sided Unification) which
allows accessing attributed variables states via the

Variable Tag syntax. Thats a relative old thingy, that
you find in some older papers and in some existing
Prolog systems. But as soon as an attributed variable

is instantiated, its dict state doesn't interest
anymore, unless you rollback the instantiation in
backtracking. That instantiated variables are invisible

in a Prolog systems, as it transpired to me when discussing
with Julio Di Egidio, is knowledge for him burried deep
in a book of seven seals. What can you expect from

a person who has never seen the innards of a Prolog system?

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> How SWI-Prolog went down hills. Its
> very easy to see. It lost the following
> hotshots over time:
> 
> - Paulo Moura (Logtalk)
> - Markus Triska (CLP(Z))
> - Ulrich Neumerkel (ISO)
> - Who else?
> 
> With whom is SWI-Prolog now collaborating?
> Manuel Hermenegildo on PIPs. I don't see that
> SWI-Prolog and Ciao Prolog make can even
> 
> make a single coherent proposal, that would
> satisfy the critera at least 2 systems implement
> the feature. They are too different.
> 
> So PIP is abused for corrobation, of possible
> harmonization, where it should be really
> proposals, and not discussion.
> 
> Bye

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

Thread

How SWI-Prolog went down hills Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-09-27 19:50 +0200
  Re: Julio Di Egidio has never heard of unification (Was: How SWI-Prolog went down hills) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-09-27 20:41 +0200
    The PoC (Proof of Concept) aspect of a PIP (Was: Julio Di Egidio has never heard of unification) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-09-28 08:15 +0200
      Help! We need Boris the Loris, its all Fuzzy (Was: The PoC (Proof of Concept) aspect of a PIP) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-09-28 08:24 +0200
        My Citation Source : SWI-Prolog discourse (Was: Help! We need Boris the Loris, its all Fuzzy) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-09-28 08:30 +0200
          SWI-Prolog as the gravity of all: Dream Big / Dream Standard (Was: My Citation Source : SWI-Prolog discourse) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-09-28 08:46 +0200
            How to make a tag variable an attributed variable (Was: SWI-Prolog as the gravity of all: Dream Big / Dream Standard) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-09-28 14:41 +0200
  Julio Di Egidio has never heard of unification (Was: How SWI-Prolog went down hills) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-09-27 20:10 +0200

csiph-web