[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Debugging forall/3
From: |
Daniel Diaz |
Subject: |
Re: Debugging forall/3 |
Date: |
Sun, 6 Jan 2013 19:04:38 +0100 |
Hi,
Le 4 janv. 2013 à 05:01, Jan Burse <address@hidden> a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I just see (p(a), q(a), q(b) in the database):
>
> | ?- forall(p(a),q(a)).
> 1 1 Call: forall(p(a),q(a)) ?
> 2 2 Call: p(a) ?
> 2 2 Exit: p(a) ?
> 3 2 Call: '$not'(q(a),forall,2) ?
> 4 3 Call: q(a) ?
> 4 3 Exit: q(a) ?
> 3 2 Fail: '$not'(q(a),forall,2) ?
> 1 1 Exit: forall(p(a),q(a)) ?
>
> (1 ms) yes
>
> Is the display of the '$not' intended? How about
> the '$not' surrounding the p/1 call?
Frankly I'm not sure if it is "intended"… From the user point of view it is not
very clear if the forall/2 internal should be "traced" or not… (or maybe only
the calls to user's predicates)..
I will look how other Prolog systems perform.
Daniel
>
> Bye
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users-prolog mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/users-prolog
>
> --
> Ce message a ete verifie par MailScanner
> pour des virus ou des polluriels et rien de
> suspect n'a ete trouve.
>
--
Ce message a ete verifie par MailScanner
pour des virus ou des polluriels et rien de
suspect n'a ete trouve.