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


Groups > comp.lang.prolog > #14642

How long willl I piss on Bart Demoen (Was: Physics PhDs might never have heard of Quantifier Eliminations)

From Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
Newsgroups comp.lang.prolog
Subject How long willl I piss on Bart Demoen (Was: Physics PhDs might never have heard of Quantifier Eliminations)
Date 2025-07-10 18:39 +0200
Message-ID <104oqco$20u1b$1@solani.org> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <104oaao$20inf$1@solani.org> <104oarl$20j1d$1@solani.org> <104occh$20jqg$1@solani.org> <104ooqo$20stc$1@solani.org> <104oq1c$20toh$1@solani.org>

Show all headers | View raw


Hi,

How long willl I piss on Bart Demoen?
I don't know, as long as it takes to
clean up my cabinet full of ghosts.

After that I might do some LogNonsenseTalk
bashing again, didn't do a for a long time.
But since Paulo Moura was deciple of

following Bart Demoen in mobbing, he
deserves nothing better. But LogNonsenseTalk
is not yet a ghost, not retired yet,

still a walking Zombie...

LoL

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> But after all these years, Wikipedia still mentions:
> 
> Choice Point Elimination
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Prolog_implementations#Optimizations 
> 
> Still the complete moron Bart Demoen, drowning in
> Dunning-Kruger syndrom, of incompetent people working
> in the wrong domain, accused me of:
> 
>  > gives me the feeling that "choice point elimination" is
>  > something jb coined, and does not belong to traditional
>  > Prolog implementation terminology.
> 
> So what does Choice Point Elimination mean?
> 
>  From compiler optimization I would guess elimination
> and avoidance have the similar meaning, whereas I would
> prefer elimination. Elimination could mean to eliminate
> 
> an intermediate step. Like in quantifier elimination,
> you eliminate something that was already there but you
> could somehow get rid of it through some transformation,
> 
> you don't really avoid it. So the Physics PhDs Bart Demoen
> which had no education in mathematical logic is no
> way excused. He was just exposing the dark side of
> 
> wrong people in wrong places.
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have really interesting ghosts in by cabinet.
>> Not only old software, also crazy people like
>> Bart Demoen. And the good thing everything is
>>
>> still available through Google Groups that
>> has nicely preserved comp.lang.prolog. According
>> Barty Boy the term "Choice Point Elimination"
>>
>> didn't really exist:
>>
>>  > Anyway, I have no idea what "choice point
>>  > elimination" is supposed to refer to in literature.
>>  >
>>  > Literally, "choice point elimination" should mean
>>  > something related to: a choicepoint was created
>>  > some technique eliminates that choice point
>>
>> https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.prolog/c/qnwD_TEG4xg/m/LMiDtFY1dQIJ
>>
>> Well he is somehow right if "elimination" is
>> interpreted as creating and then destroying.
>> But it could also mean preventing the creation
>>
>> of a choice point. You never know from the
>> far of a the flemish / dutch mountains what a
>> term means. Even if somebody presents a corpus
>>
>> resarch as I did.
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> There is one thing that currently causes me headaches.
>>> So far the Dogelog Player design didn't have a big
>>> ping pong from Prolog to Native and back.
>>>
>>> It has the Main Design with Prolog --> Native, and
>>> the 2nd Design with Native --> Prolog. We also managed
>>> to do some clause indexing preparation
>>>
>>> in the Main Design, so we have this separation of concerning
>>> currently for first argument indexing:
>>>
>>> - Computation of Clause Key Value: Prolog
>>>    The computation of the Key Value of a clause is done
>>>    at compile time in pure Prolog. There are two strategies,
>>>    for dynamic predicates the key is directly taken from
>>>    the first argument of the head.
>>>
>>>    For static predicates the body of the claue is also
>>>    analyzed, and this can also give a key, like for
>>>    exaple if the body as a unification X = C, and X
>>>    appears as first argument, the the key can be taken from C.
>>>
>>> - Computation of Goal/Head Key Value: Native
>>>    The clauses are supplied with their Key Value, and
>>>    Native code does add them with indexing. Or update the
>>>    index when a clause is removed.
>>>
>>>    The computation of the Key Value of a goal or clause
>>>    head is done a runtime in Native. And then the lookup
>>>    is done natively as well.
>>>
>>> Now I wonder how I can bring multi-argument JIT Indexing
>>> from formerly Jekejeke Prolog into the picture, and still
>>> have a high degree of 100% Prolog code. Some hurdles:
>>>
>>> - Clause Key Value on Demand: Native -> Prolog
>>>    So if I would keep the scheme that Prolog determines the
>>>    clause Key Values. And if I would do this on demand,
>>>    I would have a Native -> Prolog call.
>>>
>>> - Clauses would need decompile:
>>>    Even if I implement such a Native -> Prolog hook,
>>>    the problem is Clauses have not the compile time format
>>>    at runtime. So the my old 100% Prolog code for Clause
>>>    Key Value will not work, requires first decompilation.
>>>
>>> - YAP approach:
>>>    I have an old paper from YAP. For the indexing they
>>>    are scanning the native clause code. I didn't double
>>>    check yet what SWI-Prolog (has JIT-ing) or Scryer Prolog
>>>    (doesn't do it JIT style?). Etc...
>>>
>>> - What else?
>>>
>>> Well its not a big headache, but a kind of blocker,
>>> before I decide what to do. There are a couple of options
>>> to get out of the dilemma, and turn the Prolog systems
>>>
>>> around, and make it 100% Prolog again. Its like the
>>> big beautiful bill by Donald Trump. Make Prolog
>>> 100% Prolog again!
>>>
>>> LoL
>>>
>>> Bye
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Most of the libraries and the system are design so
>>>> that native is a last resort. So most functionality is
>>>> Prolog and in a few instances there is a native call:
>>>>
>>>> - Main Design:
>>>>
>>>>    Prolog (a lot of it) --> Native (very little)
>>>>
>>>> This design, concerning the call control flow, is only
>>>> broken in the top level, and in very few places, like the
>>>> browser and a web server. The top-level is a native entry
>>>>
>>>> point and it needs to reach into Prolog, and the
>>>> libraries library(react) and library(spin) provide call
>>>> back facilities for the browser and a web
>>>>
>>>> server event handlers:
>>>>
>>>> - 2nd Design:
>>>>
>>>>    Native (top-level, react and spin) --> Prolog
>>>>
>>>> There is no idea at all that the Prolog system supports
>>>> any iterators. I did this in the past. But the Prolog
>>>> system gets simpler without the viewpoint that the
>>>>
>>>> interface should support iterators. SWI-Prolog always
>>>> invests heavily to support iterators. Based on the
>>>> rather negative experience with formerly Jekejeke Prolog
>>>>
>>>> we tried to completely avoid any iterator interface.
>>>>
>>>> Bye
>>
> 

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


Thread

The Ghosts in my Cabinet: Indexing Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-10 12:45 +0200
  Observed while watching FAIL/REDO ports (Was: The Ghosts in my Cabinet: Indexing) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-10 12:46 +0200
    Shocking Revelation: No eGovernment can trust Prolog! (Was: Observed while watching FAIL/REDO ports) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-10 13:26 +0200
      Easier certification with 100% Prolog Prolog? (Was: Shocking Revelation: No eGovernment can trust Prolog!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-10 14:05 +0200
        Doing a Prolog system without any iterator API (Was: Easier certification with 100% Prolog Prolog?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-10 14:14 +0200
          The headache with JIT indexing: Native -> Prolog (Was: Doing a Prolog system without any iterator API) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-10 14:40 +0200
            Just lets burn another candle for Barty Boy (Was: The headache with JIT indexing: Native -> Prolog) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-10 18:13 +0200
              Physics PhDs might never have heard of Quantifier Eliminations (Re: Just lets burn another candle for Barty Boy) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-10 18:33 +0200
                How long willl I piss on Bart Demoen (Was: Physics PhDs might never have heard of Quantifier Eliminations) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-10 18:39 +0200
                But I shouldn't waste too much time (Was: How long willl I piss on Bart Demoen) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-10 19:13 +0200
  DCG is easily affected (Was: The Ghosts in my Cabinet: Indexing) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-11 09:38 +0200
    The headache an eGovernment might get from Prolog (Was: DCG is easily affected) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-15 15:20 +0200
      Wait till they find out about compare/3 (Was: The headache an eGovernment might get from Prolog) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-15 15:24 +0200
        Corr. (Was: Wait till they find out about compare/3) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-15 15:28 +0200
          eGovernements will need AGI to survive (Was: Corr. (Was: Wait till they find out about compare/3)) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-15 18:41 +0200
            Having 2544 issues is probably a bad sign (Re: eGovernements will need AGI to survive) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-15 18:41 +0200
              The Signal Collapse gives us System Uncertainty (Re: Having 2544 issues is probably a bad sign) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-15 19:02 +0200
                Rename GitHub, to TurdPit, and make Amber Heard their CEO (Was: The Signal Collapse gives us System Uncertainty) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-15 19:52 +0200
            Humans are just overwhelmed by computers (Was: eGovernements will need AGI to survive) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-16 18:59 +0200
              Fishy 🐟 in Scryer Prolog and SWI-Prolog (Was: Humans are just overwhelmed by computers) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-16 20:08 +0200
                So we are essentially all using Trojan Horses 🐎 daily? (Re: Fishy 🐟 in Scryer Prolog and SWI-Prolog) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-17 10:57 +0200
                Strudel Rust gives Scryer Frust 💩: Try C+20 Pipes (Was: Fishy 🐟 in Scryer Prolog and SWI-Prolog( Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-25 22:55 +0100
              SWI-Prolog as a Test Bed for Copilots (Was: Humans are just overwhelmed by computers) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-20 14:36 +0200
                Mathematics currently hates Computer Science because of AI (Re: SWI-Prolog as a Test Bed for Copilots) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-07-20 15:13 +0200

csiph-web