users-prolog
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [SWIPL] support for extended library


From: Alois Schloegl
Subject: Re: [SWIPL] support for extended library
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 17:32:19 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20110505 Iceowl/1.0b1 Icedove/3.0.11

On 06/08/11 16:44, Jan Wielemaker wrote:
On 06/08/2011 04:19 PM, Alois Schloegl wrote:
A colleague of mine wants to have SICStus Prolog. When I mentioned free
alternatives like gprolog and swi-prolog, his reasoning for using
SICStus Prolog over gprolog/swi-prolog is, that

"Sicstus has a strong library support. For example: Library for list
operations:

1. Sicstus:
http://www.sics.se/sicstus/docs/latest4/html/sicstus.html/lib_002dlists.html



2. SWI:
http://www.swi-prolog.org/pldoc/doc_for?object=section%282,%27A.12%27,swi%28%27/doc/Manual/lists.html%27%29%29



3. GPrologcolleague
http://www.swi-prolog.org/pldoc/doc_for?object=section%282,%27A.12%27,swi%28%27/doc/Manual/lists.html%27%29%29


You probably wanted another web address here :-)

Of course, the correct link is this:
http://www.gprolog.org/manual/html_node/gprolog043.html


Therefore, I'm wondering whether there are resources out there that
address this issue.

There is no standard for library(lists). As a result, some of the stuff
is in different places. E.g., include/3 is in library(apply),
transpose/2 is (not that I like it), in library(clpfd), etc. Richard
O'Keefe proposed a new library structure [1]. This document surely
acts as a guideline for developers when making a decision about changes,
but it is not yet widely adopted.

I assume that if there is sufficient demand, people will complain
and submit additions to the list library.

On a broader scope, I think both the SICStus and SWI-Prolog libraries
cover a lot of ground. Both have comprehensive and well
developed areas and weaker spots. Overall, my guess would be that the
SICStus libraries are stronger manipulating Prolog terms and the SWI
libraries are stronger in communication and reading/writing external
file formats.

Cheers --- Jan

[1] http://www.cs.otago.ac.nz/staffpriv/ok/pllib.htm



Jan, thanks. I'll forward this information to my colleague.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]