From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Ha Ha, LogNonsenseTalk at its best:

Future work
Arm–twist Prolog implementers for better
support for rational terms and tabling https://logtalk.org/papers/colp2012/coinduction_colp2012_slides.pdf

Ok, here is a suggestion. Propose a (@<)/2 for rational terms.
Then talk again.
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

(@<) can be useful for tabling tries. So I guess LogNonsenseTalk
work about co-induction was highly influenced by the following
seminal paper in logic programming dating back to the 70s:
How to Levitate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2I5J1ArmeM
LMAO!
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Dienstag, 4. April 2023 um 10:05:18 UTC+2:

Ha Ha, LogNonsenseTalk at its best:

Future work
Arm–twist Prolog implementers for better
support for rational terms and tabling https://logtalk.org/papers/colp2012/coinduction_colp2012_slides.pdf

Ok, here is a suggestion. Propose a (@<)/2 for rational terms.

Then talk again.

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Other Levitating experts on the scene: Ulrich Neumerkel
and Markus Triska. It is now the year 2023, and they
still discuss number_chars/3:
number_chars/2 sometimes yields wrong results https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog/issues/1773
Whereas their Scryer Prolog cannot do correctly
(@<) on rational trees aka cyclic terms. It even never
comes to their mind, to apply KISS principle
to the number_chars/3 problem, and instead
read the requirement for what number_chars/3
accepts to read it as "integer" where:
integer (* 6.4 *)
= [ layout text sequence (* 6.4.1 *) ] ,
integer token (* 6.4.4 *) ;
Why not simply strip down the relevant production
requirement for number_chars/3 "integer token" only,
or maybe something even simpler, and forget about
all the layout nonsense? Most programming languages
do it this way. Just checkout parseInteger() or parseFloat()
across languages such as Java, JavaScript, Python etc..
No language designer is so debilated to include in the integer
or float syntax layout or comments. This happens only when
you have Levitating experts on the scene.
LoL
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Dienstag, 4. April 2023 um 10:10:56 UTC+2:

(@<) can be useful for tabling tries. So I guess LogNonsenseTalk
work about co-induction was highly influenced by the following
seminal paper in logic programming dating back to the 70s:

How to Levitate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2I5J1ArmeM

LMAO!
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Dienstag, 4. April 2023 um 10:05:18 UTC+2:

Ha Ha, LogNonsenseTalk at its best:

Future work
Arm–twist Prolog implementers for better
support for rational terms and tabling https://logtalk.org/papers/colp2012/coinduction_colp2012_slides.pdf

Ok, here is a suggestion. Propose a (@<)/2 for rational terms.

Then talk again.

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

About the KISS principle:
KISS, an acronym for "Keep it simple, stupid!", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle
Hope this Helps!
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Dienstag, 4. April 2023 um 10:20:01 UTC+2:

Other Levitating experts on the scene: Ulrich Neumerkel
and Markus Triska. It is now the year 2023, and they
still discuss number_chars/3:

number_chars/2 sometimes yields wrong results https://github.com/mthom/scryer-prolog/issues/1773

Whereas their Scryer Prolog cannot do correctly
(@<) on rational trees aka cyclic terms. It even never
comes to their mind, to apply KISS principle

to the number_chars/3 problem, and instead
read the requirement for what number_chars/3
accepts to read it as "integer" where:

integer (* 6.4 *)
= [ layout text sequence (* 6.4.1 *) ] ,
integer token (* 6.4.4 *) ;

Why not simply strip down the relevant production
requirement for number_chars/3 "integer token" only,
or maybe something even simpler, and forget about

all the layout nonsense? Most programming languages
do it this way. Just checkout parseInteger() or parseFloat()
across languages such as Java, JavaScript, Python etc..

No language designer is so debilated to include in the integer
or float syntax layout or comments. This happens only when
you have Levitating experts on the scene.

LoL
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Dienstag, 4. April 2023 um 10:10:56 UTC+2:

(@<) can be useful for tabling tries. So I guess LogNonsenseTalk
work about co-induction was highly influenced by the following
seminal paper in logic programming dating back to the 70s:

How to Levitate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2I5J1ArmeM

LMAO!
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Dienstag, 4. April 2023 um 10:05:18 UTC+2:

Ha Ha, LogNonsenseTalk at its best:

Future work
Arm–twist Prolog implementers for better
support for rational terms and tabling https://logtalk.org/papers/colp2012/coinduction_colp2012_slides.pdf

Ok, here is a suggestion. Propose a (@<)/2 for rational terms.

Then talk again.

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

This blog post has a nice easter egg at the end. https://www.philipzucker.com/harrop-checkpoint/
Elaborating on it I get the following:

/* File comvars2.p */
:- op(1200, xfy, =>).
:- op(1150, fx, hypo).

term_expansion((:- hypo(F/N)), (H :- shift(in(H)))) :-
functor(H, F, N).

(A => B) :-
reset(B, in(C), Cont),
(Cont == 0 -> true; (C = A; shift(in(C))), Cont).

Here is test case of embedded implication backtracking:

:- hypo p/1.

?- reset((p(1) => p(2) => p(X)), in(_), Cont), Cont==0.
X = 2,
Cont = 0 ;
X = 1,
Cont = 0 ;
false.
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

When I try the same with Scryer Prolog:

/* File comvars2sc.p */
:- use_module(library(cont)).

:- op(1200, xfy, =>).
:- op(1150, fx, hypo).

term_expansion((:- hypo(F/N)), (H :- shift(in(H)))) :-
functor(H, F, N).

(A => B) :-
reset(B, in(C), Cont),
(Cont = none -> true; Cont = cont(G) -> (C = A; shift(in(C))), G).

I get a segmentation fault during backtracking:

?- reset((p(1) => p(2) => p(X)), in(_), Cont), Cont==none.
X = 2, Cont = none
; Segmentation fault

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Samstag, 22. April 2023 um 15:26:19 UTC+2:

This blog post has a nice easter egg at the end. https://www.philipzucker.com/harrop-checkpoint/
Elaborating on it I get the following:

/* File comvars2.p */
:- op(1200, xfy, =>).
:- op(1150, fx, hypo).

term_expansion((:- hypo(F/N)), (H :- shift(in(H)))) :-
functor(H, F, N).

(A => B) :-
reset(B, in(C), Cont),
(Cont == 0 -> true; (C = A; shift(in(C))), Cont).

Here is test case of embedded implication backtracking:

:- hypo p/1.

?- reset((p(1) => p(2) => p(X)), in(_), Cont), Cont==0.
X = 2,
Cont = 0 ;
X = 1,
Cont = 0 ;
false.

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

I always thought these new type systems only provide gradual
typing. But a keyword here seems to be flow sensitive typing(**). And
there are more players in town:
Microsoft: Typescript
Facebook: Flow(***)
What else?
Flow has funny things like an exact object type {| .. |}. A straight
forward Prolog “linter”(*) isn’t flow sensitive, since it wouldn’t validate
different types along disjunction or if-then-else branches?
(*) Logtalk even barks on disjunctions?
Clauses whose body is a disjunction https://logtalk.org/manuals/devtools/linter.html
(**)
Flow-sensitive typing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow-sensitive_typing
(***)
Flow vs TypeScript: Which is Better in 2023? https://www.scalablepath.com/javascript/flow-vs-typescript
Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Mittwoch, 12. September 2018 um 21:28:29 UTC+2:

As a last note, thanks for all your publicity
on Logtalk. There's true in the saying that
there isn't such thing as bad publicity!

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Ha Ha, twice nonsense doesn't give something Ok.
Now Logtalk has this implemention:

variant(Term1, Term2) :-
\+ \+ subsumes_term(Term1, Term2),
\+ \+ subsumes_term(Term2, Term1). https://github.com/LogtalkDotOrg/logtalk3/blob/master/library/types/term.lgt#L102

Spot the 2 errors. Here are the errors:

Error 1: There is no need for garbage collection \+ \+ in
subsumes_term/2. It does already undo its bindings.
Thats the difference between subsumes/2 and subsumes_term/2,

that subsumes_term/2 does not leave some bindings,
is only a test predicate.
See also here:

On success, the bindings are undone. https://www.swi-prolog.org/pldoc/man?predicate=subsumes_term/2

Error 2: According to Ulrich Neumerkels account
here this is only half correct. There is a copy_term/2
missing:

variant_correct(A, B) :-
copy_term(A, AC),
subsumes_term(AC, B),
subsumes_term(B, AC). https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/ulrich/iso-prolog/built-in_predicates
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

In as far this Quintus adapter is nonsense:

subsumes_term(General, Specific) :-
subsumes(General, Specific). https://github.com/LogtalkDotOrg/logtalk3/blob/master/adapters/quintus.pl#L255

SICStus Prolog tells me it should be either:

subsumes_term(General, Specific) :-
subsumes_chk(General, Specific).

Or then this here:

subsumes_term(General, Specific) :-
\+ \+ subsumes(General, Specific). https://quintus.sics.se/isl/quintus/html/quintus/lib-tma-subsumes.html

Mostowski Collapse schrieb am Samstag, 13. Mai 2023 um 15:52:02 UTC+2:

Ha Ha, twice nonsense doesn't give something Ok.
Now Logtalk has this implemention:

variant(Term1, Term2) :-
\+ \+ subsumes_term(Term1, Term2),
\+ \+ subsumes_term(Term2, Term1). https://github.com/LogtalkDotOrg/logtalk3/blob/master/library/types/term.lgt#L102

Spot the 2 errors. Here are the errors:

Error 1: There is no need for garbage collection \+ \+ in
subsumes_term/2. It does already undo its bindings.
Thats the difference between subsumes/2 and subsumes_term/2,

that subsumes_term/2 does not leave some bindings,
is only a test predicate.
See also here:

On success, the bindings are undone. https://www.swi-prolog.org/pldoc/man?predicate=subsumes_term/2

Error 2: According to Ulrich Neumerkels account
here this is only half correct. There is a copy_term/2
missing:

variant_correct(A, B) :-
copy_term(A, AC),
subsumes_term(AC, B),
subsumes_term(B, AC). https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/ulrich/iso-prolog/built-in_predicates

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Thats probably the most brain damaged nonsense I
have ever seen. Whats the programming pattern?
Inverted control, which inverted again?
Printing messages and asking questions https://logtalk.org/manuals/userman/printing.html
Nobody uses such nonsense in practice. Neither
Python, nor JavaScript, provide something as absurd
as this "framework". Its kind of a perverted logging
framework, that lacks Internationalization/Localization.
And the bad news is, it goes really back to Quintus Prolog,
you find it here in this documentation:
Quintus Prolog User’s Manual https://quintus.sics.se/isl/quintus/pdf/quintus.pdf
But its not something that somebody would use in a
modern application. The most horrible section in the
Quintus Prolog User's Manual is the idea to
translate DCG. What can go wrong? You need to
understand the syntax and semantics of DCG to do that.
Ever found a translator that can massage DCGs?
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

The Quintus Prolog User's Manual describes a method that predates
the idea of resource bundles, as found for example Java. It not only
predates that idea, it also shows a different idea. It goes on:
"By default, generate_message/3 sends the
message term through the English message
generator, messages(’english/QU_messages’)."
The misery is then this advice:
To have all messages printed in another language, the basic steps are as follows
1. Take a copy of ‘QU_messages.pl’ and translate all the messages.
2. Test the translated ‘QU_messages.pl’ and then install it
in the Quintus Prolog directory hierarchy.
3. Install or re-install Quintus Prolog to get a version that uses the translated messages.
So there is no locale parameter in the runtime? And there is
no extension mechanism, you need to go into the system folders
and change them? And you cannot build applications, libraries
or systems that offer multiple languages, have bundled multiple
languages. Why, is there not enough memory on the disk
and in the RAM? LoL
Mild Shock schrieb am Freitag, 28. Juli 2023 um 13:58:06 UTC+2:

Thats probably the most brain damaged nonsense I
have ever seen. Whats the programming pattern?
Inverted control, which inverted again?

Printing messages and asking questions https://logtalk.org/manuals/userman/printing.html

Nobody uses such nonsense in practice. Neither
Python, nor JavaScript, provide something as absurd
as this "framework". Its kind of a perverted logging

framework, that lacks Internationalization/Localization.
And the bad news is, it goes really back to Quintus Prolog,
you find it here in this documentation:

Quintus Prolog User’s Manual https://quintus.sics.se/isl/quintus/pdf/quintus.pdf

But its not something that somebody would use in a
modern application. The most horrible section in the
Quintus Prolog User's Manual is the idea to

translate DCG. What can go wrong? You need to
understand the syntax and semantics of DCG to do that.
Ever found a translator that can massage DCGs?

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.lang.prolog

Now I have added the power of resources bundles, through
a very simple new 100% pure Prolog solution to Dogelog Player,
which I am currently backporting to formerly Jekejeke Prolog.
One can try the following in Example 02: Website Sandbox:
?- X is 1/0.
Error: Division by zero.
user:1
?- set_prolog_flag(sys_locale, de_CH).
true.
?- X is 1/0.
Fehler: Nulldivision.
user:2
Very beautiful and very simple! Not the brainless Quintus
copypasta of Logtalk. Whats the competence behing Logtalk?
Is it a demonstration of how to be stupid, dumb and uninspired?
Mild Shock schrieb am Freitag, 28. Juli 2023 um 14:06:11 UTC+2:

The Quintus Prolog User's Manual describes a method that predates
the idea of resource bundles, as found for example Java. It not only predates that idea, it also shows a different idea. It goes on:

"By default, generate_message/3 sends the
message term through the English message
generator, messages(’english/QU_messages’)."

The misery is then this advice:

To have all messages printed in another language, the basic steps are as follows
1. Take a copy of ‘QU_messages.pl’ and translate all the messages.
2. Test the translated ‘QU_messages.pl’ and then install it
in the Quintus Prolog directory hierarchy.
3. Install or re-install Quintus Prolog to get a version that uses the translated messages.

So there is no locale parameter in the runtime? And there is
no extension mechanism, you need to go into the system folders
and change them? And you cannot build applications, libraries

or systems that offer multiple languages, have bundled multiple
languages. Why, is there not enough memory on the disk
and in the RAM? LoL
Mild Shock schrieb am Freitag, 28. Juli 2023 um 13:58:06 UTC+2:

Thats probably the most brain damaged nonsense I
have ever seen. Whats the programming pattern?
Inverted control, which inverted again?

Printing messages and asking questions https://logtalk.org/manuals/userman/printing.html

Nobody uses such nonsense in practice. Neither
Python, nor JavaScript, provide something as absurd
as this "framework". Its kind of a perverted logging

framework, that lacks Internationalization/Localization.
And the bad news is, it goes really back to Quintus Prolog,
you find it here in this documentation:

Quintus Prolog User’s Manual https://quintus.sics.se/isl/quintus/pdf/quintus.pdf

But its not something that somebody would use in a
modern application. The most horrible section in the
Quintus Prolog User's Manual is the idea to

translate DCG. What can go wrong? You need to
understand the syntax and semantics of DCG to do that.
Ever found a translator that can massage DCGs?

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114