Groups > comp.lang.prolog > #12554 > unrolled thread

50 Years of Prolog Nonsense

Started by	Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com>
First post	2022-01-28 07:41 -0800
Last post	2025-08-01 03:01 +0200
Articles	20 on this page of 200 — 6 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.prolog

  50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-01-28 07:41 -0800
    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-01-28 07:47 -0800
      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-01-28 07:49 -0800
        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-01-28 07:59 -0800
          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-01-28 08:07 -0800
            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-01-28 08:10 -0800
              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-01-28 08:15 -0800
                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-01-28 08:33 -0800
                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-01-28 08:35 -0800
                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-01-28 08:52 -0800
                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-02-02 03:46 -0800
                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-02-04 03:18 -0800
                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-02-08 06:04 -0800
                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2022-02-08 15:06 +0100
                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-02-08 13:23 -0800
                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-02-08 13:35 -0800
                            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-02-08 13:42 -0800
                              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-02-08 13:48 -0800
                                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-02-08 16:17 -0800
                                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-02-08 16:34 -0800
                                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-04 01:01 -0700
                                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-04 01:03 -0700
                                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-04 13:10 -0700
                                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-05 15:32 -0700
                                            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-16 17:30 -0700
                                              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-17 05:10 -0700
                                                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-17 13:39 -0700
                                                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-17 13:53 -0700
                                                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-23 13:57 -0700
                                                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-24 05:32 -0700
                                                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-24 11:47 -0700
                                                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-24 14:49 -0700
                                                            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2022-04-29 13:27 +0200
                                                              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2022-04-29 13:37 +0200
                                                                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 08:38 -0700
                                                                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 08:45 -0700
                                                                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-04 11:35 -0700
                                                                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 00:21 -0700
                                                                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 00:52 -0700
                                                                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 00:58 -0700
                                                                            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 01:23 -0700
                                                                              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 03:04 -0700
                                                                                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 03:08 -0700
                                                                                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 03:19 -0700
                                                                                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 03:56 -0700
                                                                                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 04:07 -0700
    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2022-01-29 15:56 +0100
      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2022-01-29 16:05 +0100
        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2022-01-29 16:56 +0100
          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-01-31 10:37 -0800
            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-01-31 10:45 -0800
    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 12:03 -0700
      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 02:44 -0700
        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 02:49 -0700
          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 03:11 -0700
            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-06-10 05:54 -0700
              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-06-25 02:39 -0700
                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-06-25 02:41 -0700
                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-07-12 00:45 -0700
                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-07-12 01:03 -0700
                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-07-12 01:28 -0700
                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-07-12 01:28 -0700
                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-07-12 01:40 -0700
                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Markus Triska <triska@logic.at> - 2022-07-12 19:25 +0200
                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-07-12 14:50 -0700
                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-07-12 15:01 -0700
                            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-07-12 15:16 -0700
                              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-07-12 16:02 -0700
                                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-07-12 16:22 -0700
                                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-07-12 16:32 -0700
                                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-07-13 07:08 -0700
                                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-04 17:58 -0700
                                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-04 18:01 -0700
                                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-05 01:16 -0700
                                            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-05 01:19 -0700
                                              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-05 04:07 -0700
                                                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-05 04:25 -0700
                                                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-05 07:56 -0700
                                                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-05 07:56 -0700
                                                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-05 08:14 -0700
                                                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-06 12:45 -0700
                                                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-06 12:47 -0700
                                                            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-07 05:24 -0700
                                                              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-07 05:26 -0700
                                                                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-07 05:32 -0700
                                                                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-07 06:50 -0700
                                                                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-08 15:07 -0700
                                                                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-08 15:16 -0700
                                                                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-09 03:23 -0700
                                                                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-09 12:27 -0700
                                                                            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-09 12:33 -0700
                                                                              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-13 04:13 -0700
                                                                                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-13 04:41 -0700
                                                                                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-13 05:19 -0700
                                                                                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-13 07:20 -0700
                                                                                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-13 07:30 -0700
                                                                                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-13 07:46 -0700
                                                                                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-18 07:16 -0700
                                                                                            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-18 07:17 -0700
                                                                                              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-18 15:13 -0700
                                                                                                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-28 15:04 -0700
                                                                                                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-21 10:42 -0700
                                                                                                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-22 06:13 -0700
                                                                                                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-22 06:23 -0700
                                                                                                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-22 06:41 -0700
                                                                                                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-23 07:44 -0700
                                                                                                            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-25 07:10 -0700
                                                                                                              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-25 07:11 -0700
                                                                                                                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-25 08:55 -0700
                                                                                                                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-25 08:56 -0700
                                                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Markus Triska <triska@logic.at> - 2023-08-31 21:32 +0200
                                                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-09-01 12:02 -0700
                                                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-04-09 00:15 +0200
                                                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-04-09 00:20 +0200
                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2023-05-20 14:09 +0200
                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-05-20 05:46 -0700
                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-05-20 05:48 -0700
                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-05-20 06:16 -0700
                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-05-27 04:51 -0700
                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-06-01 14:10 -0700
                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-06-01 14:11 -0700
                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-06-01 14:17 -0700
                            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-06-03 05:20 -0700
                              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-06-03 09:10 -0700
                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-06-02 00:44 -0700
                  PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-09-29 17:22 +0200
                    Prolog Pearls I: Barklund and Millroth (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-08 15:07 +0100
                      Prolog Pearls II: Barklund and Millroth (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-08 15:29 +0100
                        change_arg/3 = nb_linkarg/3 ? (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-08 18:37 +0100
                          Re: change_arg/3 = nb_linkarg/3 ? (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-08 18:39 +0100
                    Re: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-09 15:47 +0100
                      Re: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-09 15:48 +0100
    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2022-09-25 21:19 +0200
      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2022-09-25 21:21 +0200
        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-27 10:11 -0700
          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2022-09-27 19:13 +0200
            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-28 03:33 -0700
              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-28 03:34 -0700
                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-28 03:37 -0700
              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-28 03:56 -0700
                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-28 05:01 -0700
              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-28 06:44 -0700
    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-12-18 16:21 -0800
      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-12-18 16:22 -0800
        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-12-25 16:00 -0800
          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 21:53 -0800
            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 22:03 -0800
              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 22:29 -0800
                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-02 10:51 -0800
                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 21:17 -0800
                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 21:36 -0800
                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 21:50 -0800
                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-07 07:35 -0800
                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-14 07:53 -0800
                            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 08:54 -0800
                              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 10:02 -0800
                                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 15:37 -0800
                                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-29 07:19 -0800
                                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-29 07:20 -0800
                                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-29 07:32 -0800
                                        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-29 07:55 -0800
                                          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-01-30 07:06 -0800
                                            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 00:49 -0800
                                              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 00:53 -0800
                                                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-02-20 06:23 -0800
                                                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-02-20 06:31 -0800
                                              How working with GitHub feels (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-03-13 14:45 +0100
                                                Re: How working with GitHub feels (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-03-13 15:05 +0100
    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-03-12 09:12 -0700
      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-03-12 09:14 -0700
        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-03-14 17:57 -0700
          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2023-03-15 02:01 +0100
            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2023-03-15 02:09 +0100
              Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-03-28 06:07 -0700
                Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-03-28 06:30 -0700
                  Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-03-28 10:04 -0700
                    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-03-28 10:05 -0700
                      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-04-02 15:10 -0700
    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-05-25 08:48 -0700
      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-05-25 08:53 -0700
        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-05-25 09:02 -0700
    Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-29 04:57 -0700
      Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-29 05:10 -0700
        Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2023-07-29 23:16 +0200
          Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-30 05:06 -0700
            Re: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 01:09 -0700
      How I got rid of term_variables/3 (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-10 12:37 +0100
        Re: How I got rid of term_variables/3 (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-10 12:40 +0100
          Re: How I got rid of term_variables/3 (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-10 12:42 +0100
      How Prolog became an education nightmare (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-12 16:30 +0100
        Re: How Prolog became an education nightmare (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-12 16:32 +0100
          Re: How Prolog became an education nightmare (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-14 05:14 +0100
            Re: How Prolog became an education nightmare (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-14 05:24 +0100
            Re: How Prolog became an education nightmare (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2024-11-14 21:21 +0100
              Re: How Prolog became an education nightmare (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-14 21:58 +0100
                Re: How Prolog became an education nightmare (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-14 22:10 +0100
                Re: How Prolog became an education nightmare (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2024-11-15 15:42 +0100
        Mode yfy to the rescue (Was: How Prolog became an education nightmare) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2024-11-14 22:30 +0100
        Cyclic term predicates suffer from ambiguity (Was: How Prolog became an education nightmare) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-01 02:47 +0200
          An ISO term_variables/2 for Cyclic Terms (Was: Cyclic term predicates suffer from ambiguity) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-08-01 03:01 +0200

Page 7 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 Next page →

#13654

From	Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com>
Date	2023-06-01 14:11 -0700
Message-ID	<083a0dcc-b342-4381-a20d-e4dcb2e59425n@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#13653

Today I had for some minutes a strong feeling
of obsolence, was even imagining that these could
be my last days where I write some "program code".

This happened after I saw ChatGPT doing logic.
Although was reading about "Low Code / No Code"
already for a while. So which profession gets hit first?

Profiles of the future : an inquiry into the limits of the possible
Arthur C. Clarke - 1962, Chapter 18: The Obsolence of Man
https://archive.org/details/profilesoffuture00clar/page/222/mode/2up

Arthur C. Clarke talks
A Space Odyssey and artificial intelligence, 1968
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNJbUYD-pfo 

Mild Shock schrieb am Donnerstag, 1. Juni 2023 um 23:10:34 UTC+2:
> June, 2023 Update: It might be the case, that ChatGPT has improved 
> in logic. Here it does even modal logic, and you can ask it to produce 
> proofs without LEM. ChatGPT does the following tasks: 
> 
> Here’s how you can translate the proof into natural deduction: 
> Here’s an alternative proof that does not rely on LEM: 
> Here’s the translation of the proof into Fitch-style natural deduction: 
> Here’s the translation of the proof into Gentzen’s tree-style natural deduction: 
> Here’s the translation of the proof into sequent-style natural deduction: 
> https://chat.openai.com/share/79ae4f02-fd07-4786-800b-305bc9eed143

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13655

From	Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com>
Date	2023-06-01 14:17 -0700
Message-ID	<90f2518a-65e4-4d58-8b11-c556978523b3n@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#13654

Wao! I love coding so much, maybe should jump
into no-coding. How would I setup my computer
and have myself better skills, so that I would

do no-coding. Like the current project I am
wroking on. A ChatGPT AI would first need to
have a model/context of my current project.

And then maybe I could sit back, ask it:
Please do this for me, please do that for me.
Which would be on second thought quite swell! 

Mild Shock schrieb am Donnerstag, 1. Juni 2023 um 23:11:50 UTC+2:
> Today I had for some minutes a strong feeling 
> of obsolence, was even imagining that these could 
> be my last days where I write some "program code". 
> 
> This happened after I saw ChatGPT doing logic. 
> Although was reading about "Low Code / No Code" 
> already for a while. So which profession gets hit first? 
> 
> Profiles of the future : an inquiry into the limits of the possible 
> Arthur C. Clarke - 1962, Chapter 18: The Obsolence of Man 
> https://archive.org/details/profilesoffuture00clar/page/222/mode/2up 
> 
> Arthur C. Clarke talks 
> A Space Odyssey and artificial intelligence, 1968 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNJbUYD-pfo
> Mild Shock schrieb am Donnerstag, 1. Juni 2023 um 23:10:34 UTC+2: 
> > June, 2023 Update: It might be the case, that ChatGPT has improved 
> > in logic. Here it does even modal logic, and you can ask it to produce 
> > proofs without LEM. ChatGPT does the following tasks: 
> > 
> > Here’s how you can translate the proof into natural deduction: 
> > Here’s an alternative proof that does not rely on LEM: 
> > Here’s the translation of the proof into Fitch-style natural deduction: 
> > Here’s the translation of the proof into Gentzen’s tree-style natural deduction: 
> > Here’s the translation of the proof into sequent-style natural deduction: 
> > https://chat.openai.com/share/79ae4f02-fd07-4786-800b-305bc9eed143

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13658

From	Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com>
Date	2023-06-03 05:20 -0700
Message-ID	<a85fb0f3-beea-4ee1-bdc7-8ccabad4866fn@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#13655

So its just a matter of time, like months or weeks,
and we have ChatGPT integrated in IDEs at
our desktop, coding help at our fingertips:

"In line with our iterative deployment philosophy, 
we are gradually rolling out plugins in ChatGPT 
so we can study their real-world use, impact, and 
safety and alignment challenges—all of which 
we’ll have to get right in order to achieve our mission."
https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt-plugins

They are quite on mission. This will suplant GitHub 
Copilot? Well doesn't matter GitHub Copilot uses
also OpenAI Codex. But in March 2023, OpenAI shut 
down access to Codex, but I guess they didn't do

it for some moratorium, they have a better replacement:

"On March 23rd, we will discontinue support for the 
Codex API. All customers will have to transition to a 
different model. Codex was initially introduced as a 
free limited beta in 2021, and has maintained 

that status to date. Given the advancements of our 
newest GPT-3.5 models for coding tasks, we will no 
longer be supporting Codex and encourage all customers 
to transition to GPT-3.5-Turbo. 

About GPT-3.5-Turbo GPT-3.5-Turbo is the most 
cost effective and performant model in the GPT-3.5 
family. It can both do coding tasks while also being 
complemented with flexible natural language capabilities."
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35242069

Mild Shock schrieb am Donnerstag, 1. Juni 2023 um 23:17:48 UTC+2:
> Wao! I love coding so much, maybe should jump 
> into no-coding. How would I setup my computer 
> and have myself better skills, so that I would 
> 
> do no-coding. Like the current project I am 
> wroking on. A ChatGPT AI would first need to 
> have a model/context of my current project. 
> 
> And then maybe I could sit back, ask it: 
> Please do this for me, please do that for me. 
> Which would be on second thought quite swell!
> Mild Shock schrieb am Donnerstag, 1. Juni 2023 um 23:11:50 UTC+2: 
> > Today I had for some minutes a strong feeling 
> > of obsolence, was even imagining that these could 
> > be my last days where I write some "program code". 
> > 
> > This happened after I saw ChatGPT doing logic. 
> > Although was reading about "Low Code / No Code" 
> > already for a while. So which profession gets hit first? 
> > 
> > Profiles of the future : an inquiry into the limits of the possible 
> > Arthur C. Clarke - 1962, Chapter 18: The Obsolence of Man 
> > https://archive.org/details/profilesoffuture00clar/page/222/mode/2up 
> > 
> > Arthur C. Clarke talks 
> > A Space Odyssey and artificial intelligence, 1968 
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNJbUYD-pfo 
> > Mild Shock schrieb am Donnerstag, 1. Juni 2023 um 23:10:34 UTC+2: 
> > > June, 2023 Update: It might be the case, that ChatGPT has improved 
> > > in logic. Here it does even modal logic, and you can ask it to produce 
> > > proofs without LEM. ChatGPT does the following tasks: 
> > > 
> > > Here’s how you can translate the proof into natural deduction: 
> > > Here’s an alternative proof that does not rely on LEM: 
> > > Here’s the translation of the proof into Fitch-style natural deduction: 
> > > Here’s the translation of the proof into Gentzen’s tree-style natural deduction: 
> > > Here’s the translation of the proof into sequent-style natural deduction: 
> > > https://chat.openai.com/share/79ae4f02-fd07-4786-800b-305bc9eed143

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13659

From	Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com>
Date	2023-06-03 09:10 -0700
Message-ID	<0ac7c1d6-62e0-466a-9102-5bf6415466e0n@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#13658

Interestingly there are supposedly ChatGPT 
plugins with real-time information integration. 
A browser ChatGPT plugin for example:

Unleashing the Power of AI Conversations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2RW4qx-45Q

Mild Shock schrieb am Samstag, 3. Juni 2023 um 14:20:06 UTC+2:
> So its just a matter of time, like months or weeks, 
> and we have ChatGPT integrated in IDEs at 
> our desktop, coding help at our fingertips: 
> 
> "In line with our iterative deployment philosophy, 
> we are gradually rolling out plugins in ChatGPT 
> so we can study their real-world use, impact, and 
> safety and alignment challenges—all of which 
> we’ll have to get right in order to achieve our mission." 
> https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt-plugins 
> 
> They are quite on mission. This will suplant GitHub 
> Copilot? Well doesn't matter GitHub Copilot uses 
> also OpenAI Codex. But in March 2023, OpenAI shut 
> down access to Codex, but I guess they didn't do 
> 
> it for some moratorium, they have a better replacement: 
> 
> "On March 23rd, we will discontinue support for the 
> Codex API. All customers will have to transition to a 
> different model. Codex was initially introduced as a 
> free limited beta in 2021, and has maintained 
> 
> that status to date. Given the advancements of our 
> newest GPT-3.5 models for coding tasks, we will no 
> longer be supporting Codex and encourage all customers 
> to transition to GPT-3.5-Turbo. 
> 
> About GPT-3.5-Turbo GPT-3.5-Turbo is the most 
> cost effective and performant model in the GPT-3.5 
> family. It can both do coding tasks while also being 
> complemented with flexible natural language capabilities." 
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35242069
> Mild Shock schrieb am Donnerstag, 1. Juni 2023 um 23:17:48 UTC+2:

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13657

From	Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com>
Date	2023-06-02 00:44 -0700
Message-ID	<500d2533-a110-4617-bb99-b20501a5ac37n@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#13653

The ChatGPT template above was not done by me. Credits
go to Joseph Vidal-Rosset. That conversations and thus interaction
specific context and mini learnt model extensions can be

shared via share links seems to be a new feature of ChatGPT.
I saw this feature appear only yesterday in ChatGPT.

See also:
https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq

Mild Shock schrieb am Donnerstag, 1. Juni 2023 um 23:10:34 UTC+2:
> June, 2023 Update: It might be the case, that ChatGPT has improved 
> in logic. Here it does even modal logic, and you can ask it to produce 
> proofs without LEM. ChatGPT does the following tasks: 
> 
> Here’s how you can translate the proof into natural deduction: 
> Here’s an alternative proof that does not rely on LEM: 
> Here’s the translation of the proof into Fitch-style natural deduction: 
> Here’s the translation of the proof into Gentzen’s tree-style natural deduction: 
> Here’s the translation of the proof into sequent-style natural deduction: 
> https://chat.openai.com/share/79ae4f02-fd07-4786-800b-305bc9eed143

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14206 — PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense)

From	Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
Date	2024-09-29 17:22 +0200
Subject	PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense)
Message-ID	<vdbrc4$1327p$1@solani.org>
In reply to	#13633

Hi,

How did the basilisk lived so long at the chamber of
secrets? I always just figured they were excellent at
hibernating and only awoke once called for.

How it started:

 > We hope that a collection of PIPs will
increase the visibility of Prolog and its growth.
https://prolog-lang.pages.software.imdea.org/implementors-forum/FAQ.html

How its going:

11:00-11:15 Proposal: Binary prefix operators. Presenter: François Fages
11:15-11:30 Proposal: CSV interface. Presenter: Daniel Jurjo
https://prolog-lang.org/ImplementersForum/PIPWorkshop2024.html

These talks will possibly be published in some
Spinger Journal behind a paywall right?

Nobody has seen these PIPs elsewhere so far.

Bye

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14268 — Prolog Pearls I: Barklund and Millroth (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber)

From	Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
Date	2024-11-08 15:07 +0100
Subject	Prolog Pearls I: Barklund and Millroth (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber)
Message-ID	<vgl5ur$bdrd$1@solani.org>
In reply to	#14206

Hi,

Interestingly in the old times, Prolog dicts that
are functional datastructures were called
multiple version hash tables (MVIIT):

Hash Tables in Logic Programming
The paper gives informal semantics for hash tables
as partial functions on logical terms for Prolog's
Horn clause language, and the implementation has been
used in Tricia, an implementation of Prolog
developed at Uppsala University.
Jonas Barklund and Hakan Millroth,
International Conference on Logic Programming 1987,
https://www2.it.uu.se/research/csd/reports/0040.pdf

Oki Doki

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> How did the basilisk lived so long at the chamber of
> secrets? I always just figured they were excellent at
> hibernating and only awoke once called for.
> 
> How it started:
> 
>  > We hope that a collection of PIPs will
> increase the visibility of Prolog and its growth.
> https://prolog-lang.pages.software.imdea.org/implementors-forum/FAQ.html
> 
> How its going:
> 
> 11:00-11:15 Proposal: Binary prefix operators. Presenter: François Fages
> 11:15-11:30 Proposal: CSV interface. Presenter: Daniel Jurjo
> https://prolog-lang.org/ImplementersForum/PIPWorkshop2024.html
> 
> These talks will possibly be published in some
> Spinger Journal behind a paywall right?
> 
> Nobody has seen these PIPs elsewhere so far.
> 
> Bye

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14269 — Prolog Pearls II: Barklund and Millroth (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber)

From	Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
Date	2024-11-08 15:29 +0100
Subject	Prolog Pearls II: Barklund and Millroth (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber)
Message-ID	<vgl77s$beg9$1@solani.org>
In reply to	#14268

Hi,

Okay, there is another one. Now we are getting
closer to change_arg/3, the physical representation
of what was omitted in the previous paper

now becomes a face. But its not really change_arg/3.
What they try here is still multi versioned,
so its more a change_arg/4. Maybe SWI-Prolog has

something like this somewhere? I had setarg/4
in formerly Jekejeke Prolog:

Integrating Complex Data Structures in Prolog
A number of data structures, primitive operations on
them (which could not have been efficiently coded in
Prolog) and various ways of integrating them in
Edinburgh Prolog without destroying its
uniformity are proposed.
Jonas Barklund and Hakan Millroth - 1987
International Conference on Spoken Language Processing},
https://www2.it.uu.se/research/csd/reports/0042.pdf

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> Interestingly in the old times, Prolog dicts that
> are functional datastructures were called
> multiple version hash tables (MVIIT):
> 
> Hash Tables in Logic Programming
> The paper gives informal semantics for hash tables
> as partial functions on logical terms for Prolog's
> Horn clause language, and the implementation has been
> used in Tricia, an implementation of Prolog
> developed at Uppsala University.
> Jonas Barklund and Hakan Millroth,
> International Conference on Logic Programming 1987,
> https://www2.it.uu.se/research/csd/reports/0040.pdf
> 
> Oki Doki
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> How did the basilisk lived so long at the chamber of
>> secrets? I always just figured they were excellent at
>> hibernating and only awoke once called for.
>>
>> How it started:
>>
>>  > We hope that a collection of PIPs will
>> increase the visibility of Prolog and its growth.
>> https://prolog-lang.pages.software.imdea.org/implementors-forum/FAQ.html
>>
>> How its going:
>>
>> 11:00-11:15 Proposal: Binary prefix operators. Presenter: François Fages
>> 11:15-11:30 Proposal: CSV interface. Presenter: Daniel Jurjo
>> https://prolog-lang.org/ImplementersForum/PIPWorkshop2024.html
>>
>> These talks will possibly be published in some
>> Spinger Journal behind a paywall right?
>>
>> Nobody has seen these PIPs elsewhere so far.
>>
>> Bye
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14270 — change_arg/3 = nb_linkarg/3 ? (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber)

From	Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
Date	2024-11-08 18:37 +0100
Subject	change_arg/3 = nb_linkarg/3 ? (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber)
Message-ID	<vgli9h$lhqn$1@solani.org>
In reply to	#14269

I came up with a findall/3 for SWI-Prolog that
doesn’t use call_cleanup/2. The findall2/3 realization
uses nb_linkarg/3 and duplicate_term/2.

findall2(Template, Goal, List) :-
    sys_find2_init(State),
    (Goal, sys_find2_next(Template, State), fail; true),
    sys_find2_fini(State, List).

sys_find2_init(X) :-
    X = v(_,_),
    C = [-|_],
    nb_linkarg(1, X, C),
    nb_linkarg(2, X, C).

sys_find2_next(T, X) :-
    C = [_|_],
    duplicate_term(T, H),
    nb_linkarg(1, C, H),
    arg(1, X, J),              %%% known end cell
    nb_linkarg(2, J, C),
    nb_linkarg(1, X, C).

sys_find2_fini(v(C,D), L) :-
    nb_linkarg(2, C, []),
    arg(2, D, L).

Its not as fast as the bundled findall/3.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14271 — Re: change_arg/3 = nb_linkarg/3 ? (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber)

From	Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
Date	2024-11-08 18:39 +0100
Subject	Re: change_arg/3 = nb_linkarg/3 ? (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber)
Message-ID	<vglicd$lhqn$2@solani.org>
In reply to	#14270

Interestingly the findall2/3 is not
impressed by calling garbage_collect/0
or trim_stacks/0:

/* SWI-Prolog 9.3.14 */
?- findall2(Y-X-Y, (between(1,10,X);garbage_collect,
     trim_stacks, between(11,20,X)), L), write(L).
[_212-1-_212,_230-2-_230,_248-3-_248,_266-4-_266,
_284-5-_284,_302-6-_302,_320-7-_320,_338-8-_338,
_356-9-_356,_374-10-_374,_396-11-_396,_418-12-_418,
_440-13-_440,_462-14-_462,_484-15-_484,_506-16-_506,
_528-17-_528,_550-18-_550,_572-19-_572,_594-20-_594]

Memory consumption is also the same:

?- between(4,8,K), N is 10^K, space(findall(X,
between(1,N,X),_)), fail; true.
% Memory 0.229 mB
% Memory 4.162 mB
% Memory 33.522 mB
% Memory 268.403 mB
ERROR: Stack limit (1.0Gb) exceeded

?- between(4,8,K), N is 10^K, space(findall2(X,
between(1,N,X),_)), fail; true.
% Memory 0.393 mB
% Memory 4.063 mB
% Memory 33.423 mB
% Memory 268.304 mB
ERROR: Stack limit (1.0Gb) exceeded

But I still do not 100% believe that
it works...

Mild Shock schrieb:
> I came up with a findall/3 for SWI-Prolog that
> doesn’t use call_cleanup/2. The findall2/3 realization
> uses nb_linkarg/3 and duplicate_term/2.
> 
> findall2(Template, Goal, List) :-
>     sys_find2_init(State),
>     (Goal, sys_find2_next(Template, State), fail; true),
>     sys_find2_fini(State, List).
> 
> sys_find2_init(X) :-
>     X = v(_,_),
>     C = [-|_],
>     nb_linkarg(1, X, C),
>     nb_linkarg(2, X, C).
> 
> sys_find2_next(T, X) :-
>     C = [_|_],
>     duplicate_term(T, H),
>     nb_linkarg(1, C, H),
>     arg(1, X, J),              %%% known end cell
>     nb_linkarg(2, J, C),
>     nb_linkarg(1, X, C).
> 
> sys_find2_fini(v(C,D), L) :-
>     nb_linkarg(2, C, []),
>     arg(2, D, L).
> 
> Its not as fast as the bundled findall/3.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14272 — Re: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense)

From	Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
Date	2024-11-09 15:47 +0100
Subject	Re: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense)
Message-ID	<vgnsmu$d3as$1@solani.org>
In reply to	#14206

I can speed it up, if I use nb_setarg/3 instead
of the explicit duplicate_term/2 and nb_linkarg/3 combo.
The change is as follows:

/* Before */
sys_find2_next(T, X) :-
    C = [_|_],
    duplicate_term(T, H),
    nb_linkarg(1, C, H),
    arg(1, X, J),
    nb_linkarg(2, J, C),
    nb_linkarg(1, X, C)

/* After */
sys_find2_next(T, X) :-
    C = [_|_],
    nb_setarg(1, C, T),
    arg(1, X, J),
    nb_linkarg(2, J, C),
    nb_linkarg(1, X, C).

Now the timings are better:

/* Before */
?- time(test2).
% 6,007,999 inferences, 0.422 CPU in 0.427
seconds (99% CPU, 14241183 Lips)
true.

/* After */
?- time(test2).
% 5,007,999 inferences, 0.297 CPU in 0.298
seconds (100% CPU, 16869049 Lips)
true.

A wooping more than 100 milliseconds are gone!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14273 — Re: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense)

From	Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
Date	2024-11-09 15:48 +0100
Subject	Re: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense)
Message-ID	<vgnsol$d3as$2@solani.org>
In reply to	#14272

With this little change it already beats all
the call_cleanup/2 based findall/3 implementations
around from some novell Prolog systems:

/* Trealla Prolog 2.59.15 */
?- time(test).
% Time elapsed 0.356s, 3004004 Inferences, 8.436 MLips
    true.

/* Scryer Prolog 0.9.4-201 */
?- time(test).
    % CPU time: 0.464s, 5_062_044 inferences
    true.

Mild Shock schrieb:
> I can speed it up, if I use nb_setarg/3 instead
> of the explicit duplicate_term/2 and nb_linkarg/3 combo.
> The change is as follows:
> 
> /* Before */
> sys_find2_next(T, X) :-
>     C = [_|_],
>     duplicate_term(T, H),
>     nb_linkarg(1, C, H),
>     arg(1, X, J),
>     nb_linkarg(2, J, C),
>     nb_linkarg(1, X, C)
> 
> /* After */
> sys_find2_next(T, X) :-
>     C = [_|_],
>     nb_setarg(1, C, T),
>     arg(1, X, J),
>     nb_linkarg(2, J, C),
>     nb_linkarg(1, X, C).
> 
> Now the timings are better:
> 
> /* Before */
> ?- time(test2).
> % 6,007,999 inferences, 0.422 CPU in 0.427
> seconds (99% CPU, 14241183 Lips)
> true.
> 
> /* After */
> ?- time(test2).
> % 5,007,999 inferences, 0.297 CPU in 0.298
> seconds (100% CPU, 16869049 Lips)
> true.
> 
> A wooping more than 100 milliseconds are gone!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13249

From	Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm>
Date	2022-09-25 21:19 +0200
Message-ID	<tgq9jr$3jvn$1@solani.org>
In reply to	#12554

One more question. Do SWI-Prolog have a smallint
fast path for A/B, or does it always detour over
some kind of mpq_get_d_nearest?

The advantage of float(A)/float(B) is, it is already
a smallint fastpath for A and B smallint. That
is a smallint fastpath, seen that this has count C=0:

?- between(1,1000000,N), (33*33*N)/33
=\= float(33*N).

Some results concerning timing:

/* SWI-Prolog 8.5.17, Windows */
% 2,000,003 inferences, 0.297 CPU in 0.290 seconds (102% CPU, 6736852 Lips)

/* SWI-Prolog 8.4.2, Unix WSL2 */
% 2,000,003 inferences, 0.337 CPU in 0.337 seconds (100% CPU, 5929587 Lips)

/* Jekejeke Prolog 1.5.4, JDK 19 */
% Threads 297 ms, GC 3 ms, Up 290 ms (Current 09/25/22 18:38:00)

/* Jekejeke Prolog 1.5.4, JDK 1.8 */
% Threads 188 ms, GC 2 ms, Up 186 ms (Current 09/25/22 18:39:33)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13250

From	Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm>
Date	2022-09-25 21:21 +0200
Message-ID	<tgq9n9$3jvn$2@solani.org>
In reply to	#13249

Smalint fastpath results for (/)/2 and for other Prolog
systems, only the timing, otherwise they all agree C=0:

/* Trealla Prolog 2.2.6 */
% Time elapsed 0.151s

/* ECLiPSe Prolog 7.0.61 */
% Yes (0.75s cpu)

/* Ciao Playground 1.21.0 */
% Wall time 784.0 ms

/* Scryer Prolog 0.9.0 */
% CPU time: 1.314s

The only good result is by Trealla Prolog.

Mostowski Collapse schrieb:
> One more question. Do SWI-Prolog have a smallint
> fast path for A/B, or does it always detour over
> some kind of mpq_get_d_nearest?
> 
> The advantage of float(A)/float(B) is, it is already
> a smallint fastpath for A and B smallint. That
> is a smallint fastpath, seen that this has count C=0:
> 
> ?- between(1,1000000,N), (33*33*N)/33
> =\= float(33*N).
> 
> Some results concerning timing:
> 
> /* SWI-Prolog 8.5.17, Windows */
> % 2,000,003 inferences, 0.297 CPU in 0.290 seconds (102% CPU, 6736852 Lips)
> 
> /* SWI-Prolog 8.4.2, Unix WSL2 */
> % 2,000,003 inferences, 0.337 CPU in 0.337 seconds (100% CPU, 5929587 Lips)
> 
> /* Jekejeke Prolog 1.5.4, JDK 19 */
> % Threads 297 ms, GC 3 ms, Up 290 ms (Current 09/25/22 18:38:00)
> 
> /* Jekejeke Prolog 1.5.4, JDK 1.8 */
> % Threads 188 ms, GC 2 ms, Up 186 ms (Current 09/25/22 18:39:33)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13252

From	Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com>
Date	2022-09-27 10:11 -0700
Message-ID	<a838c2e4-c0dd-4297-9eec-f96418aab309n@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#13250

Here is a 100% pure Prolog implementation of HALF_EVEN, without
any materialization, it assumes that the current float/1 does only mpz_get_d:

float_half_even(X,Y) :- 
     (getbit(X, msb(X)-53) =:= 0; 
      getbit(X, msb(X)-52) =:= 0, msb(X)-53 =:= lsb(X)), !, Y is float(X).
float_half_even(X,Y) :-
     Y is nexttoward(float(X), 1E300).

Was using 1E300 for infinity, is there something else that would work?
float_half_even/2 is just a translation of the following into Prolog:

public double doubleValue() {
https://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/jdk/file/tip/src/share/classes/java/math/BigInteger.java#l3871

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13253

From	Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm>
Date	2022-09-27 19:13 +0200
Message-ID	<tgvb0b$68gl$1@solani.org>
In reply to	#13252

Here some test whether it agrees with BigInteger.
doubleValue(), first testing the old version of
SWI-Prolog, where float is mpz_get_d:

/* SWI-Prolog 8.5.17 */
?- between(1,10,N), X is 10^20+N*2^13,
float_half_even(X,Y), write(Y), nl, fail; true.
1.0e+20
1.0000000000000002e+20
1.0000000000000003e+20
1.0000000000000003e+20
1.0000000000000003e+20
1.0000000000000005e+20
1.0000000000000007e+20
1.0000000000000007e+20
1.0000000000000007e+20
1.0000000000000008e+20

Comparing with a Prolog system that calls
BigInteger.doubleValue():

/* Jekejeke Prolog 1.5.4 */
?- between(1,10,N), X is 10^20+N*2^13,
Y is float(X), write(Y), nl, fail; true.
1.0E20
1.0000000000000002E20
1.0000000000000003E20
1.0000000000000003E20
1.0000000000000003E20
1.0000000000000005E20
1.0000000000000007E20
1.0000000000000007E20
1.0000000000000007E20
1.0000000000000008E20

Yeah, they agree! Riddle solved, the misterious
veil of the secret souce behind an ultrafast
float/1 for bigint has been lifted.

Mostowski Collapse wrote:
> Here is a 100% pure Prolog implementation of HALF_EVEN, without
> any materialization, it assumes that the current float/1 does only mpz_get_d:
> 
> float_half_even(X,Y) :-
>       (getbit(X, msb(X)-53) =:= 0;
>        getbit(X, msb(X)-52) =:= 0, msb(X)-53 =:= lsb(X)), !, Y is float(X).
> float_half_even(X,Y) :-
>       Y is nexttoward(float(X), 1E300).
> 
> Was using 1E300 for infinity, is there something else that would work?
> float_half_even/2 is just a translation of the following into Prolog:
> 
> public double doubleValue() {
> https://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/jdk/file/tip/src/share/classes/java/math/BigInteger.java#l3871
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13254

From	Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com>
Date	2022-09-28 03:33 -0700
Message-ID	<0aa4b385-4fcd-4624-a888-32619eb2c8e1n@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#13253

Quite some disagreement concerning (**)/2:

/* Ciao Playground 1.21.0 */
?- Z is 51**10.
Z = 119042423827613000.0 ? 

/* ECLiPSe Prolog 7.0.61 */
?- X is 51**10.
X = 1.1904242382761301e+17

Guess which one corresponds to HALF_EVEN ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13255

From	Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com>
Date	2022-09-28 03:34 -0700
Message-ID	<4f47fb19-4cf2-4891-b611-ba63ccc02bbcn@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#13254

Whats also funny when a Prolog system disagrees internally:

/* SWI-Prolog 8.5.17, Windows 10 */
?- X is 51^10, Z is float(X), Y is nexttoward(Z, 1E300).
X = 119042423827613001,
Z = 1.1904242382761301e+17,
Y = 1.1904242382761302e+17.

?- Z is float(51^10), Y is nexttoward(Z, 1E300).
Z = 1.19042423827613e+17,
Y = 1.1904242382761301e+17.

The above "bug" makes it hard for me to test float_half_even/2.

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Mittwoch, 28. September 2022 um 12:33:22 UTC+2:
> Quite some disagreement concerning (**)/2:
> /* Ciao Playground 1.21.0 */
> ?- Z is 51**10. 
> Z = 119042423827613000.0 ?
> /* ECLiPSe Prolog 7.0.61 */
> ?- X is 51**10. 
> X = 1.1904242382761301e+17 
> 
> Guess which one corresponds to HALF_EVEN ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13256

From	Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com>
Date	2022-09-28 03:37 -0700
Message-ID	<fdab5060-0438-433d-b827-98f1239a7477n@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#13255

If I do nothing, I cannot make mistakes. Could be
the motto that Ciao Prolog doesn't support (^)/2
as an evaluable predicate.

But among those Prolog systems that take the 
risk (clap clap!!) and support (^)/2 the situation 
is a little immature, I find:

Scryer Prolog and Trealla Prolog, they both do wrong 
float/1 rounding (1.19042423827613e+17
instead 1.1904242382761301E17):

/* Scryer Prolog 0.9.0 */
?- X is 51^10, Z is float(X).
   X = 119042423827613001, Z = 1.19042423827613e17.
?- Z is float(51^10).
   Z = 1.19042423827613e17.

But Trealla Prolog has a problem with (^)/2, wrong 
result of bigint pow() (i.e. 119042423827613008 instead
119042423827613001):

/* Trealla Prolog 2.2.10 */
?- X is 51^10, Z is float(X).
   X = 119042423827613008, Z = 1.19042423827613e+17.
?- Z is float(51^10).
   Z = 1.19042423827613e+17.

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Mittwoch, 28. September 2022 um 12:34:44 UTC+2:
> Whats also funny when a Prolog system disagrees internally: 
> 
> /* SWI-Prolog 8.5.17, Windows 10 */ 
> ?- X is 51^10, Z is float(X), Y is nexttoward(Z, 1E300). 
> X = 119042423827613001, 
> Z = 1.1904242382761301e+17, 
> Y = 1.1904242382761302e+17. 
> 
> ?- Z is float(51^10), Y is nexttoward(Z, 1E300). 
> Z = 1.19042423827613e+17, 
> Y = 1.1904242382761301e+17. 
> 
> The above "bug" makes it hard for me to test float_half_even/2.
> Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Mittwoch, 28. September 2022 um 12:33:22 UTC+2: 
> > Quite some disagreement concerning (**)/2: 
> > /* Ciao Playground 1.21.0 */ 
> > ?- Z is 51**10. 
> > Z = 119042423827613000.0 ? 
> > /* ECLiPSe Prolog 7.0.61 */ 
> > ?- X is 51**10. 
> > X = 1.1904242382761301e+17 
> > 
> > Guess which one corresponds to HALF_EVEN ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13257

From	Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com>
Date	2022-09-28 03:56 -0700
Message-ID	<f934efb4-69f4-4c27-8b33-0d0b4c31d97dn@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#13254

To judge that ECLiPSe Prolog is correct, one
needs to think in binary representation. We find,
using a precise float to bigint conversion:

?- X is integer(1.1904242382761301E17).
X = 119042423827613008.

?- X is integer(1.19042423827613E17).
X = 119042423827612992.

Now which one is closer?

?- X is 119042423827613001-119042423827613008.
X = -7.

?- X is 119042423827613001-119042423827612992.
X = 9.

So 1.1904242382761301E17 is the correct float.

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Mittwoch, 28. September 2022 um 12:33:22 UTC+2:
> Quite some disagreement concerning (**)/2:
> /* Ciao Playground 1.21.0 */
> ?- Z is 51**10. 
> Z = 119042423827613000.0 ?
> /* ECLiPSe Prolog 7.0.61 */
> ?- X is 51**10. 
> X = 1.1904242382761301e+17 
> 
> Guess which one corresponds to HALF_EVEN ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 7 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 Next page →

csiph-web

50 Years of Prolog Nonsense

Contents

#13654

#13655

#13658

#13659

#13657

#14206 — PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense)

#14268 — Prolog Pearls I: Barklund and Millroth (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber)

#14269 — Prolog Pearls II: Barklund and Millroth (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber)

#14270 — change_arg/3 = nb_linkarg/3 ? (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber)

#14271 — Re: change_arg/3 = nb_linkarg/3 ? (Was: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber)

#14272 — Re: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense)

#14273 — Re: PIPs from the Basilisk Chamber (Was: 50 Years of Prolog Nonsense)

#13249

#13250

#13252

#13253

#13254

#13255

#13256

#13257