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

Groups > comp.lang.prolog > #12808

Re: Is this correct Prolog?

From Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc>
Newsgroups comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, comp.lang.prolog
Subject Re: Is this correct Prolog?
Message-ID <20220501131951.00000889@reddwarf.jmc> (permalink)
References (5 earlier) <uombK.379436$Gojc.287190@fx99.iad> <pPSdnSU56NRla_D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <VTmbK.655548$mF2.416033@fx11.iad> <Apidnc59pLnwZvD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <t4l5hq$8bi$1@dont-email.me>
Organization Jupiter Mining Corp
Date 2022-05-01 13:19 +0100

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 23:24:05 -0600
Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> wrote:

> On 4/30/2022 9:15 PM, olcott wrote:
> > On 4/30/2022 10:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:  
> >> On 4/30/22 10:56 PM, olcott wrote:  
> >>> On 4/30/2022 9:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote:  
> >>>> On 4/30/22 10:21 PM, olcott wrote:  
> >>>>> On 4/30/2022 9:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:  
> >>>>>> On 4/30/22 9:42 PM, olcott wrote:  
> >>>>>>> On 4/30/2022 8:08 PM, Richard Damon wrote:  
> >>>>>>>> On 4/30/22 3:02 AM, olcott wrote:  
> >>>>>>>>> LP := ~True(LP) is translated to Prolog:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ?- LP = not(true(LP)).
> >>>>>>>>> LP = not(true(LP)).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ?- unify_with_occurs_check(LP, not(true(LP))).
> >>>>>>>>> false.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> (SWI-Prolog (threaded, 64 bits, version 7.6.4)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350789898_Prolog_detects_and_rejects_pathological_self_reference_in_the_Godel_sentence 
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>  
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Since it isn't giving you a "syntax error", it is probably 
> >>>>>>>> correct Prolog. Not sure if your interpretation of the
> >>>>>>>> results is correct.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> All that false means is that the statement
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> LP = not(true(LP))
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> is recursive and that Prolog can't actually evaluate it due
> >>>>>>>> to its limited logic rules.
> >>>>>>>>  
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> That is not what Clocksin & Mellish says. They say it is an 
> >>>>>>> erroneous "infinite term" meaning that it specifies
> >>>>>>> infinitely nested definition like this:  
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> No, that IS what they say, that this sort of recursion fails
> >>>>>> the test of Unification, not that it is has no possible
> >>>>>> logical meaning.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Prolog represents a somewhat basic form of logic, useful for
> >>>>>> many cases, but not encompassing all possible reasoning
> >>>>>> systems.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Maybe it can handle every one that YOU can understand, but it 
> >>>>>> can't handle many higher order logical structures.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Note, for instance, at least some ways of writing factorial
> >>>>>> for an unknown value can lead to an infinite expansion, but
> >>>>>> the factorial is well defined for all positive integers. The
> >>>>>> fact that a "prolog like" expansion operator might not be able
> >>>>>> to handle the definition, doesn't mean it doesn't have meaning.
> >>>>>>  
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It is really dumb that you continue to take wild guesses again
> >>>>> the verified facts.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please read the Clocksin & Mellish (on page 3 of my paper) text
> >>>>> and eliminate your ignorance.
> >>>>>  
> >>>>
> >>>> I did. You just don't seem to understand what I am saying
> >>>> because it is above your head.
> >>>>
> >>>> Prolog is NOT the defining authority for what is a valid logical 
> >>>> statement, but a system of programming to handle a subset of
> >>>> those statements (a useful subset, but a subset).
> >>>>
> >>>> The fact that Prolog doesn't allow something doesn't mean it
> >>>> doesn't have a logical meaning, only that it doesn't have a
> >>>> logical meaning in Prolog.  
> >>> In this case it does. I have spent thousands of hours on the
> >>> semantic error of infinitely recursive definition and written a
> >>> dozen papers on it. Glancing at one of two of the words of
> >>> Clocksin & Mellish does not count as reading it.  
> >>
> >> And it appears that you don't understand it, because you still
> >> make category errors when trying to talk about it.
> >>  
> >>>
> >>> BEGIN:(Clocksin & Mellish 2003:254)
> >>> Finally, a note about how Prolog matching sometimes differs from
> >>> the unification used in Resolution. Most Prolog systems will
> >>> allow you to satisfy goals like:
> >>>
> >>>    equal(X, X).?-
> >>>    equal(foo(Y), Y).
> >>>
> >>> that is, they will allow you to match a term against an 
> >>> uninstantiated subterm of itself. In this example, foo(Y) is
> >>> matched against Y, which appears within it. As a result, Y will
> >>> stand for foo(Y), which is foo(foo(Y)) (because of what Y stands
> >>> for), which is foo(foo(foo(Y))), and so on. So Y ends up standing
> >>> for some kind of infinite structure.
> >>> END:(Clocksin & Mellish 2003:254)
> >>>
> >>> foo(foo(foo(foo(foo(foo(foo(foo(foo(foo(foo(foo(foo(foo(foo(...))))))))))))))) 
> >>>  
> >>
> >> Right. but some infinite structures might actually have meaning.   
> > Not in this case, it is very obvious that no theorem prover can
> > possibly prove any infinite expression. It is the same thing as a
> > program that is stuck in an infinite loop.  
> 
> Richard wrote and the asshole (PO) snipped
> ------------------------------------------
> Right. but some infinite structures might actually have meaning. The 
> fact that Prolog uses certain limited method to figure out meaning 
> doesn't mean that other methods can't find the meaning.
> 
> Just like:
> 
> Fact(n) := (N == 1) ? 1 : N*Fact(n-1);

Are you mental? That definition isn't infinitely recursive as it
terminates when N equals 1 given a set of constraints on N (positive
integer greater or equal to 1).

/Flibble

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

Thread

Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-04-30 02:02 -0500
  Re: Is this correct Prolog? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-04-30 12:31 +0300
    Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 20:15 +0200
      Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-04-30 16:08 -0500
        Re: Is this correct Prolog? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-05-01 12:26 +0300
          Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 06:00 -0500
            Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 13:49 +0200
              Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 08:09 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 15:35 +0200
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 08:55 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 16:28 +0200
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 10:24 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 17:44 +0200
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 11:04 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 18:38 +0200
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 11:49 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-05-02 09:51 -0700
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 19:38 +0200
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-05-02 11:04 -0700
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 14:22 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 14:14 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 14:24 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 21:43 +0200
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 15:10 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 22:37 +0200
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 15:58 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 16:30 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 23:33 +0200
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 16:42 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-05-03 00:13 +0200
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 19:35 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-05-02 11:28 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-02 19:41 +0100
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 14:26 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 14:32 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-02 18:28 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-05-03 00:41 +0200
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-05-02 16:00 -0700
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-05-03 01:39 +0200
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-05-02 17:26 -0700
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-03 00:43 +0100
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-05-02 17:20 -0700
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 19:57 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-03 03:21 +0100
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 22:01 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-05-03 01:18 -0700
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-03 08:05 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ Tarski ] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-04 21:30 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ Tarski ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-04 22:46 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ Tarski ] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-04 22:02 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ Tarski ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-05 07:41 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ Tarski ] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 12:57 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ Tarski ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-05 12:06 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ Tarski ] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 16:23 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ Tarski ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-05 22:24 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ Tarski ] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 21:37 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ Tarski ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-06 07:43 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ Tarski ] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-06 15:29 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-03 15:59 +0100
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-03 09:18 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-03 11:08 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-03 10:52 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-03 12:05 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-03 11:17 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-03 12:33 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-03 12:23 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-03 13:59 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-03 14:03 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-03 22:24 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-03 21:54 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-04 07:27 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ André didn't lie after all ] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-03 12:08 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-05-03 12:33 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-03 14:12 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-03 13:22 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-03 21:53 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-03 23:12 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-03 22:53 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-03 22:06 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-04 01:17 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-04 08:02 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-04 14:01 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-04 19:48 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-05-03 15:58 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-03 17:13 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 19:11 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 19:35 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-02 20:47 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-05-02 07:59 -0700
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Aleksy Grabowski <hurufu@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 17:15 +0200
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 10:45 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-05-02 09:02 -0700
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 11:26 -0500
      Re: Is this correct Prolog? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-05-01 12:24 +0300
        Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 05:58 -0500
          Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 07:12 -0400
            Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 06:45 -0500
              Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 08:07 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 07:15 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 13:49 -0400
    Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-04-30 15:48 -0500
      Re: Is this correct Prolog? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-05-01 12:38 +0300
        Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 06:06 -0500
          Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 07:26 -0400
            Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 06:54 -0500
              Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 08:11 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 07:19 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 14:00 -0400
  Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-04-30 21:08 -0400
    Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-04-30 20:42 -0500
      Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-04-30 22:00 -0400
        Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-04-30 21:21 -0500
          Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-04-30 22:38 -0400
            Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-04-30 21:56 -0500
              Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-04-30 23:11 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-04-30 22:15 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-04-30 23:24 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 06:35 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 13:16 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-01 13:19 +0100
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? polcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 07:51 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 13:19 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-05-01 11:22 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-05-01 12:45 +0300
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 06:28 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 08:01 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 07:09 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 08:16 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 07:18 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 06:50 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 13:26 -0400
    Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-04-30 20:47 -0500
      Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-04-30 23:49 -0500
        Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 11:08 -0500
          Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 13:28 -0500
            Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 14:00 -0500
              Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 15:19 -0400
              Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 14:32 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 13:44 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 14:48 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 16:01 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 15:42 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 14:51 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 17:04 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 18:08 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 17:39 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 19:18 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 17:26 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 19:58 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 21:32 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 20:53 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 22:14 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 21:18 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 20:37 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 22:47 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 22:04 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 22:10 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-02 07:10 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 08:19 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-02 18:38 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 16:37 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 17:44 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 17:15 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ André is proven to be a liar ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 18:33 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ André is proven to be a liar ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 17:44 -0600
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ André is proven to be a liar ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 18:53 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ André is proven to be a liar ] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 18:15 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ André is proven to be a liar ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 19:21 -0400
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? [ André is proven to be a liar ] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 19:56 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 17:05 -0500
                Re: Is this correct Prolog? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-01 16:55 -0400
        Re: Is this correct Prolog? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-01 11:57 -0500
          Re: Is this correct Prolog? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-01 11:21 -0600

csiph-web